Venables - one of the James Bulger killers - back in jail

[LadyBlaBlah]

here

Not a good advertisement for the rehabilitation programme they went on. I did hear that it was in Ireland and he tried to strangle a girlfriend..........but obviously that is not based on any factual evidence, just internet gossip.

Anyhow, difficult difficult difficult

But Rhubs, what about JT who apparenlty ahsn't reoffended?

At worst TV is only 50% of the equation: if JT remains free then surely terhe is an idea that people can be rehabilitated?

While I can feel sympathy for them as 10 year olds, they are now 27 year old adults. If JV has breached the terms of his license, whether trivial or not, he is where he belongs. He's had nearly ten years of freedom and should have known the conditions by now.

And I can't believe anybody would criticise Denise Fergus for any part she has in the public knowing about it. There was never any real justice for James, how could there be when his murderers were babies themselves? It must twist in her heart like a knife every time she thinks about it. Anybody who wouldn't feel bitter about the whole affair, as the parent who lost a child like this, is a better person than me. Her life can never be free of it, it's written all over her face. I feel so sad for her.

No, sorry. As I said, not every abused child goes on to abuse.

I would be very careful where you go with that one as there are Mumsnetters who led very abused childhoods but who are now loving and responsible parents.

One does not make the other.

Just as abusers and killers can come from loving homes, so loving people can come from abused homes.

You make a choice. They chose the other route. It was deliberate and it was planned.

I feel so very sorry for Denise Bulger. Not only did she loose her child in incomprehensible circumstances but I do feel she is terribly exploited by the media.

They want to sell papers etc and they wheel her out, knowing she will deliver. And every time it must be like a thousand knives. Poor, poor woman.

I'm reminded of that other poor woman whose son was killed by Brady/Hyndley and body never found. Her other son wrote a wonderful piece about how angry he was that she was never allowed any peace. The TV and papers were constantly asking for comment and interviews. The hurt was constant.
Of course she felt like she had to take part, that somehow the campaigning and anger would help. But it never ever did of course.

Peachy, I don't know JT so I cannot answer that one. He could be a vile person for all we know, a bully who is clever enough not to get caught. Or he could be a pleasant young man. That's the trouble with these programmes, the public never gets to know if they really work or not.

Those two boys are under such strict supervision that they'd have to be really stupid to step out of line. Apparently one of them was.

They may never kill again, but is that because they don't want to or because they will never have the opportunity to. And if the latter, is that good enough?

'They have never said sorry, they have never shown remorse.'

Rhubarb how do you know this? I assume you are as in the dark about their current circumstances as the rest of us. Nobody knows how successful or otherwise their rehabilitation has been.

You know, reading info about this- it seems at the time itn was JT who was thought to be the more damaged, the person still free

Maybe it is that people who have the capacity to develop empathy and regret later on are more likely to get caught up in destructive cycles such as JV may have done?

The point is until we know (if) that could well be the case.

I mean, if I knew i;d done something like that then damn sure i'd either be suicidal or high on something 24/7.

When we know what has happened then we can start to learn on (or rather the people who will know can) and maybe act appropriately but until then it is speculation.

And you know- there are crimes JV could have been caught uip in where many would have been: maybe his child was abused and he reacted violently, maybe an awful lot of things franlkly.

becuase the ket here is we do no know

They have never apologised to Denise, we know that much.

They never showed remorse during the police interviews they gave.
If they were to show an ounce of remorse they would have at least tried to say sorry to Jamie's mother, but as far as I am aware they never have. And I'm sure if they had tried, their lawyers would have made sure it was public knowledge that they have tried - it would have been used to win public sympathy for them.

Or perhaps Peachy, he's too clever to be caught again.

TBH Rhubs, if it is becuase they never can then yes, that is good enough IMO: it is the outcome that matters, not the wherefore.

And as you say, JT may not be a vile young man. But he is subject to the same (or rather tighter due to licence) laws as anyone else so as with anyone else will be pulled up he breaks that law. Many a vile young man (and woman) out there after all

And yes, again perhaps.

But I do think its unfair to assume that without knowing.

And agree with person who said remorse may have come later: it is possible.

Well obviously not in person SGM, but I'd have thought there would be facilities in place that it could be done through parole officers and lawyers.

Rhubarb - I think if they had shown any remorse during the trial it would have simply been or at least looked contrived.

I think it is worth far more if they have shown remorse consistently years later, having been made to come to terms with what they did. They must have done that, or they wouldn't have been released.

I have no doubt that expressing it directly to the victim's Mother would be completely against the terms of any order. And quite rightly. Can you imagine how sickening that would be for her?
And what good would it do? She would never, ever believe it. How could she?

According to The Times, 'Michael Wolkind QC, a barrister in criminal law, said that the MoJ would not lightly have returned Venables to custody, running the risk that his cover would be blown in prison.' So it could well be serious. Also I don't think Denised Fergus twittered a response until AFTER it was revealed. Still, if she did, good for her.

Rhubarb they are not allowed to contact Denise, surely?

I think you are making a whole lot of assumptions about them with no evidence. None of us know their current situation wrt remorse or regret or anything else.

LitChick, rehabiliation usually does involve apologising to the victims of your crime.

I don't think they would see it as inappropriate to apologise to Denise - what is worse, never showing remorse or never having any? She probably would have thrown it back in their faces, but I don't think they would have prevented the boys from making apologies.

In adult rehabilitation you have to show remorse, but I don't think those rules applied to these two.

Myra Hindley was allowed to apologise and that was used publicly. Ian Brady has never apologised and that is possibly one of the reasons he will never be released.

No of course they are not allowed to contact Denise directly. These things are handled by the police and other authorities. But if had apologised I believe it would have been made public by their lawyers. That's how the system works.

I don't know anything about them no, but I do know a little about law.

Weren't they released because the European Court found that to have kept them imprisioned breached their human rights? I might be mistaken.

"Two years later the European court of human rights (ECHR) ruled that Venables and Thompson did not receive a fair trial and that Howard had breached human rights by intervening to raise the sentences of the killers. Jack Straw, the home secretary at the time of the ECHR ruling, had been preparing to set a new minimum tariff but he handed over responsibility to the lord chief justice in the wake of the judgment. Lord Woolf paved the way for their early release when he ruled in October 2000 that their minimum term had expired, describing the facts of their crime as "exceptionally horrific" but referring to the boys' age at the time as "the one overriding mitigating factor".

Im sure peoples opinions would be different on here if had been their child who was murdered. In my opinion 10 years old or not I think they should rot in jail sorry its pure evil.

So again, I don't THINK they have shown any remorse. They have not made any apology to Jamie's parents (which would have been handled by their lawyers and presented as evidence in the case to have them released) and needing to show remorse was not a factor in their release.