WARNING v upsetting: The Doncaster Boys., who were attacked..

[ElenorRigby]

a case from last year...
Here are the details, according a local paper.
Source

Its not pretty

"THE full horror of the terrifying and brutally violent attack on two young boys by a pair of brothers in secluded woodland in Doncaster last April has been revealed to a shocked courtroom.

A hearing at Sheffield Crown Court was yesterday given full and painfully graphic detail of the sadistic 90-minute attack by the then 10 and 11-year-old siblings involving a variety of weapons including branches, barbed wire, lit cigarettes and heavy rocks, which left one of their victims close to death and the other badly injured and deeply traumatised.

Members of the victims' families sobbed as the court was shown haunting video footage taken by the older brother on a stolen mobile phone midway through the attack. It showed his stricken 11-year-old victim shaking and covered in blood as he was prodded and taunted by the younger of the two brothers.

A child psychiatrist who had interviewed the younger brother later described him as "cold and calculating" in his ability to switch between seemingly good behaviour and acts of violence.

Dr Eileen Vizard told the court the boy represented a "high risk" to the public and warned that without prolonged and successful intervention by specialists he may have the potential to develop psychopathy.

The young perpetrators, now aged 11 and 12, were dressed smartly in shirts and ties and sat passively in the dock as their shocking catalogue of violence was laid out before a High Court judge, Mr Justice Keith.

The pair, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, robbery and intentionally causing a child to engage in a sexual act. Charges of attempted murder were dropped.

The court heard how they came across their two young victims at a playground and lured them to a secluded area with the promise of showing them a dead fox.

Once there, the brothers subjected them to a vicious 90-minute attack using branches, sharpened sticks, barbed wire, broken glass, rocks weighing up to two stone, and pieces of metal.

Both victims were repeatedly hit with tree branches and fists as they lay cowering on the ground, the court heard. Their faces were stamped on and heavy rocks dropped on their heads.

At one stage the battered and bloodied victims were forced to attempt to perform sexual acts together.

Later, one was choked with a metal hoop, the older boy putting his foot on his victim's back "for extra leverage", said Nicholas Campbell QC, prosecuting. The younger victim was strangled with a clothes line.

The same victim eventually sustained a deep wound to his arm, which the older brother forced a lit cigarette into. When the terrified nine-year-old said he needed the toilet, he was forced to urinate on his friend's face.

The court heard that as the attack reached its climax, the younger victim was ordered to kill himself. He repeatedly rammed a sharpened stick into his own mouth before slumping against a tree.

His older friend was left for dead after having part of a broken sink dropped on his head. He could not be interviewed by police until 10 days later due to the seriousness of his injuries.

The court also heard details of a strikingly similar attack carried out by the brothers on a choirboy in Edlington a week earlier.

The court was told how he too was lured to the patch of wasteland, this time with the promise of seeing a "massive toad", and how he was beaten and stamped on. The brothers have pleaded guilty to a charge of assault causing actual bodily harm.

On that occasion their 11-year-old victim was apparently saved from an even worse fate by the intervention of a passer-by. The brothers were identified a few days later and were due to attend a police station on the morning of Saturday, April 3.

Instead, they fled their foster home, and within an hour had begun their second savage attack. The pair are due to be sentenced tomorrow.

The hearing continues."

For most parents the details of case of the depravity is beyond belief.

"the most important thing is for society to be protected from such depraved personalities - regardless of how these personalities were formed."

But of course it is the most important thing. And yes, they did make a choice. And that awful choice would have been as a result of their own uprbringing.

Thus, it is very very important to ascertain how these children became as violent and sadistic as they are and take action in other possible cases in order to prevent more of these cases happening.

I don't think it's a given that these children cannot be rehabilitated. How do any of us know that?

And what does it mean "never be held accountable for their actions"? Does that mean they should be locked up forever and ever? I'm just wondering. Vengeance is not the same as justice.

Totally agree with MadameCastafiore. We need to get really really really tough with loser parents who abuse their children. No more liberal, wishy washy second chance shit. There's far too much damage being done to children already for that to be allowed.

And you know what annoys me more than anything about some you bloody people - so many of you jump to the defence of bloody dangerous dogs who maim and kill children and babies saying it the the owners fault but we are now talking about children, who never know love, who don't look you in the eye, not because they are rude but because of they dared to look their parents in the eye they would get beaten.

God I have worked in my job for such a short time and it has shocked me to the core, some of you wouldn't believe the things that go on in your neighbourhood behind closed doors - I have been abused by my father and stepmonster but compared to some of the kids I run into I have had a bloody good life. We aren't talking about toxicity or not going on day trips but consistent, sustained abuse, physical, sexual and mental - and yet you can question that these poor children are born like this??????

Please do not write these children off.

I'm not writing these children off but seriously they were in trouble with the police for what they'd done to another child the week before so they must have known what they were doing was wrong regardless of their upbringing.

Agree with what you're saying Madame but don't think it should excuse what they have done.

'Vengeance is not the same as justice.'

Did anyone say it was? If they are not taught to be responsible for their actions then there can be no rehabilitation.

And what is at question now is also the protection of society.

People in society who are not criminals or violent also have human rights.

Maybe I'm being naive and thinking that although they had that upbringing that at 10 and 11 and having been in trouble with police the week before they would have been told what they were doing was wrong. That if they had exhibited any violent behaviour whilst in care they would have been told that, so they wouldn't hav been completely as unknowing about what they were doing.

What also strikes a chord with me was one of the experts describing the older boy as cold and calculating - surely that wasn't based on just what they had done but on them and the work that had been done with them since?

None of us know the full story but I just find it hard to believe that they were completely blind to what they've done.

I don't know what the answer is I just don't understand.

Just back from reading the other thread Inside Britain's child prisons. And it has certainly been revealing to see who the children are who do do these things. And what has been done to them. And the evidence that their upbringing has actually resulted in real physical changes to their brains. And the further suggestions that some of this damage can actually be undone.

AuntieMaggie, for the children to have known that what they were doing was wrong, they needed to have known that being in trouble with the police was a bad thing. If they were brought up by parents who either told them or showed them that the police were the enemy, then how would they have come to that conclusion? Do you think children are born with such a strong conviction that the police and other authority figures are right that even a whole childhood in a family where nobody believes that can undo this conviction?

Yes, it's true that the experiences a child goes through has a result on how the brain is developing. However, it is far too complex an issue to be able to state 'cause and effect' in a black and white way. There are also children who experience severe physical and emotional abuse who don't go on to abuse, maim or kill other human beings. Likewise there are children who haven't had an abusive upbringing who go on to hurt, rape or kill. And of course there is every shade of grey in between a horribly abusive upbringing, and a 'perfect' upbringing.

Of course there was an element of choice here. It is also clear that the attack was planned, and sustained, and that the boys took pleasure in causing hurt.

First priority has to be protection of others. Everything else comes second to that.

according to the article on t'other thread, it is extremely rare for children who have not grown up in abusive environments to commit these very serious crimes

otoh as violethill says, not all children who come from these environments do commit these crimes

Exactly my point violethill but put much better than i could

I haven't read much about their background but understand they wer in fostercare when these things happen - surely they would have been told that they were wrong and that being in trouble with the police was serious?

There will always be people who have children who are not fit to bring them up. If we can protect those children then we will eliminate one of the main causes of childood crime.

The state failed all the children in this awful case. Yes, their parents are extremely culpable but unfortunateley there will always be people like this, and probably too many of them. I don't know what the answer is but a better resources Social Services Dep is probably the first step.

yes, auntiemaggie, but they'd been with their parents ~10 years, so 3 weeks in foster care is kind of pissing in the wind.

It would take a lot of reeducation to undo the effects of their upbringing - maybe the secure home can do it, maybe it can't.

On the issue of 'vengeance or justice', I also think anyone who imagines the two boys are somehow going to 'get away with' their crimes, is being naive.

They will be locked up for a very long time, until they are assessed as being rehabilitated and no longer a threat (if they ever reach that state).

And it is when they reach that point that perhaps the toughest part starts. They will be released with new identities and will be encouraged to rebuild their lives. They will get into relationships and have children of their own, and then they will look at their own kids and really know the extent of the terrible things they have done. And realistically, even with a new identity, there must always be the threat of being discovered. The people who have been personally affected by such crimes no doubt in some cases would quite happily track down and inflict the same sort of hurt on the perpetrators or their own families. It must be a lifetime of continual fear knowing there are people out there who would do the same to you.

I'm not saying I sympathise with them - I don't. It's the consequence of their own actions. But I think it's worth acknowledging that these boys - and their parents (who I hope are prosecuted too) and their siblings have had their lives changed for the worse permanently.

You know, I was joking earlier (with Awassailing) that if mn ruled the world, SS provision would go well up the agenda.

But I've thought about this and I think there is a gender/feminist/motherist/womanist angle to this.

There seems to be some sort of inhibition to really, actually acknowledging how incredibly crucial "parenting" is.

Psychologists will keep on telling us how significant failed parenting is as a factor in producing damaged children/adults and how crucial some sort of "good parenting" intervention is if we are to have any hope of rehabilitation.

And those in power will keep on paying lip-service to the importance of parenting.

But show us the money!

It's as though there is a huge block to actually, really taking it seriously. And I do wonder how much of that is linked to the fact that, by and large, it is women doing it, for free, and doing, by and large, quite well.

Look at the figures: @ £200,000 p.a. per child to intervene and try and put stuff right. that, in a way, is a weird acknowledgement of what our work, as mothers, is "worth" (in the narrowest economic sense, and an underestimate too) when we get it right.

I am struggling my way towards an understanding on this, but I do think that there is something v. weird about the fact that SS is undervalued and underfunded.

AuntieMaggie Sat 23-Jan-10 13:24:22

"I haven't read much about their background but understand they wer in fostercare when these things happen - surely they would have been told that they were wrong and that being in trouble with the police was serious?"

Aren't you being just a tad naive here. If you had spent your entire childhood being abused and brutalised by the adults around you, and your whole experience if life was that you can't trust anything grownups say because they promise you the earth one minute and then turn round and hit you for no reason, if all you knew of adults was that they never stick to the same behaviour or attitudes for two consecutive days- wouldn't it take a while for you to learn that there are actually adults worth listening to, adults you can trust, adults who always mean the same thing about what is right and wrong? If your whole experience of life was that you get cuddled when mummy's on a high and burnt with cigarettes when she is coming off her high and forced to perform oral sex with her customers when she needs money for the stuff- do you really think you would have a concept of right and wrong as something real that didn't just depend on an adult's whim?

If you read the other thread and the link to the Independent article, it's got really good stuff about how the adults working in these homes first have to teach the children that there are adults who care about them and who mean what they say from one minute to another.

hbfac - I entirely agree that Social Services need sensible funding and pay scales to do their work.

That's not the same as parenting though, and I don't think 'parenting' is something that should have loads of money thrown at it, or would necessarily benefit from having loads of money thrown at it.

I don't think there's been any evidence to show that financial poverty was a factor here - in fact, many reports state the opposite - the mother was frequently seen with loads of supermarket shopping, there was money for tobacco, alcohol and dvds. Plenty of emotional poverty, but that's entirely different.

Parenting is a choice, it should be a labour of love, we shouldn't feel we ought to be paid to be a parent (who would pay us anyway?!).

Violethill - But isn't SS brought in when parenting breaks down?

So, in some way, the devaluation of SS is linked to the devaluation of what parents (and actually, I mean mothers, because it's the stuff that women, mainly, do).

I'm genuinely thinking this through - so thanks for posting - am mulling on what you said.

Fwiw - I'm no back-to-basics person, and have real questions about the whole "supporting parenting" rhetoric.

Off at a tangent - I read the Indie article and it makes such sense from an evolutionary perspective to think that: people are learning systems, and more so when young; and they adapt to their environment in the now, not just over millenia - ie brains are plastic, esp when young. And the way we learn about environment is through others - primarily our parents, esp. our mother.

It does put "parenting" at the very heart of society.

We, as mothers, "sort of" know that, but do we "really" know that?

Violethill - re-read your post - no paying for parenting isn't where I was going with that thought. And no, I think that there is a wide, wide difference between what SS, and even intensive SS-provided rehabilitation work can provide, and good parenting. And, yes, love is pretty crucial in that.

I think I'm going more along the lines of valuing. This thread is pulling me to a stronger and stronger sense of a gap that exists in thinking about mothering (I'm not going to gender-neutralise it by calling it "parenting" when historically it was created by women, and is still mainly performed by women). We know how important and central it is but, at the same time, we diminish it, rendering is habitual and the norm, and quotidien ...

Can't think of a word ... but it is devalued precisely because, by and large, a lot of women manage to be good-enough mothers. But when something like this happens, you suddenly catch a glimpse of how important and crucial it is.

But, because of the devaluation-because-common", there is a lack of funding and valuing of the institutions set up to step in when it does go wrong .... .

I mean, social work is still largely a female profession, I'm guessing. And caring about stuff like education and social services is still seen as "Soft" (ie female) and not-sufficiently-abstract politics, isn't it?

"People in society who are not criminals or violent also have human rights."

Yes, and I wonder how many resources would be allocated to the victims to help themsort their physical and emotional wounds. I bet that the victims would be still all messed up when these 2 walk free into the world to their new opportunity.

I guess hat if I wanted resources allocated to undo damage, I would allocate them to the victims, their families and their communities.

So it's all well, agree, they need another chance, but... who will ensure that such chance and level of attention is also given to their victims?

I remember a child who was banned from my city after hundreds of offenses. He was housed in a nearby town all at the expense of the local authorities, and... what did he does in his first week of his new life? went and kill his disabled neighbour who had no idea, as anybody else in the community, what a gem had been placed among them...

So I believe the question is not whether they can be fixed but whether we can trust the authorities not to be caught in law rhethoric, like not allowing the judge to see the full documntation, leaving the community vulnerable to them, again, in the future.

Mongolia - I feel a sense of complete sadness when I think about the likelihood of the boys who were attacked receiving adequate care to overcome this. And indeed, from the little I have read, it seems that this has not happened.

The youngest boy (the little nephew,) is, apparently, "disruptive at school" - which just speaks volumes, really. It opens whole vista onto inadequate support. And does not augur well for his future happiness and fulfilment.

Nor surprising when we think that it is a failing SS system (Doncaster), within a larger, under-resourced SS system that is in charge of supporting him.

But, you know, the only way to help future victims, all of them (including abused children in failing families,) is, it would seem, to aim at intervention and rehabilitation. Which is why support is also targeted, with some sense of emergency, at the perpetrators (and potential perpetrators).

I think what I am learning is that it is a killing irony that support is so financially constrained that it only arrives, and only arrives in sufficiency, after some appalling act has been committed.

Which, again, does not augur well for the children who were the objects of this attack/these attacks.

I'd be interested to know what form their rehabilitation will take.

I absolutely agree that they need to be punished and made to understand that what they did was horrendous.

I do feel sorry for them too though. I can't imagine the sort of abuse, violence, poverty and feral existence they led in order to turn out like this.

Nancy, there is a thread currently going (Inside Britain's child prisons) which links to a very interesting article about this.

thanks Cory - will have a read.

'So I believe the question is not whether they can be fixed but whether we can trust the authorities not to be caught in law rhethoric, like not allowing the judge to see the full documntation, leaving the community vulnerable to them, again, in the future.'

I agree.

I have absolutely no faith at all that the system will rehab the perpetrators before releasing them back into society.

All too often, as well, criminals become even more damaged duriing their incarceration.

I just think of Peter Tobin's victims who survived their attack in Plymouth. They were 14 and 15 at the time he raped and attempted to murder them.

One became a heroin-addicted prostitute. The other a recluse.

Tobin walked free from prison not too long after attacking them to rape and murder at least 3 females, one of them a 15-year-old girl.

Colin Evans, a disturbed teenager with a long history of sadistic crimes, was released and relocated from Wales to Fife with no supervision.

Leaving him free to rape and murder Karen Dewar.

Mareck Harcar, a convicted criminal and murder from Slovakia, was allowed entry into the United Kingdom with no supervision, and went on to rape, murder and beat to death Moira Jones.

And on and on and on.

How can we trust the justice/correctional/rehabilitation system to protect society first and foremost with such a catalogue of failures resulting in the atrocious murders of so many?

Because when there is no faith in the justice system to first and foremost protect society from criminals, that's where you get the 'line 'em all up against the wall' 'lock 'em up and throw away the key' and support for vigilante behaviour.