John Venables- do we have a right to know???

[onebadbaby]

Do we really have the right to know if and when the killers of James Bulger re-offend?

I am inclined to say we don't. If they have been given a new identity and life then what is the point and benefit of the general public having knowledge. In my opinion, any re-offences should remain in his new name.

Obviously members of the press behold certain information on the new lives of the two killers, but I really don't see the benefit of this being public knowledge.

Also- do you remember how you thought and behaved at ten? I certainly do and in a way I don't think ten years old is under the age when responsibility for such an horrific crime has to be considered.

Opinions??

This is a ridiculous media storm over nothing, and I can't believe it's the top News at Ten story

If this story shows anything, it's that the system is working. That's all.

completely agree with both

At this stage - definitely not. People only get hysterical about it, and that helps no-one. What he did was incomprehensible, and unforgivable, but as someone wrote on another thread, we don't live in a society where we want 10 year olds locked up for life with no chance of rehabilitation.

He could have done something very minor. The licence conditions are very strict. If it is more serious than that, then i guess it will come out in the fullness of time. I don't think anyone will "benefit" from it all being plastered over the papers. And poor Jamie's mother must relive it every time his name is mentioned.

No. Thought exactly the same as listened to the '"News" at Ten' headlines. God, this is what it'll be like all the time when the tories and Murdoch are in charge.

I was talking about this with dh earlier and I said "well, he's obviously back in jail because he's committed a crime, but we don't need to know what the crime was".

But dh pointed out to me that its more likely he is in custody because he broke the very specific conditions of his release. So, in other words, he must have got close to the Bulger family, or tried to contact them?

If that is the case, then I do think that is more newsworthy.

Jon Venables.

And no, we don't.

err NO

'the right'???

No we don't. And it's a pity any of this had to come out.

No, we don't have a right to know, but morally, I think James's mother Denise deserves to know.

Bibbity
According to Radio 4 today, his licence will be v strict and he could be sent to custody for any infringement, including:
-taking illegal drugs
-returning to Merseyside area
-not keeping in contact with parole officers
Etc

It could even be a deterioration in mental health (as diagnosed by a doctor) which could put the public at risk.

Where did you get the idea it was connected to him contacting the family of his victim? That seems most unlikely to me.

Just an excuse for the media to rake over the case again without seeming ghoulish.

The chuffing radio4 journalist was reporting from outside the shopping centre where James went missing FFS. Even if it were vaguely relevant, he's on the bloody radio

From my little head SSK. As I did not know the specifics of the terms of his licence. As I said, was just chatting with dh.

I don't think we have the right and ffs lets not do anything which requires millions more of taxpayers money to give him another new identity cos this one has been blown.

No, we don't need to know.

It doesn't need to be on the news either, but I'm not surprised that it is. I heard that report too assume, ridiculous , wasn't it?

Agreed, that it proved that the system works and that offenders are monitored and conditions of his release and return to prison are taken seriously.

The papers were saying that he is engaged to be married. This means his fiancee probably doesn't know. Obviously we don't know for sure she doesn't, but it's a fair bet she's clueless.

So, notwithstanding our right to know or not, what about her right to know? Who should be more protected - a convicted murderer or a woman who's about the pledge her life to him and maybe have his children?

nope.

and I don't want to know either.

We do now, so it's a moot point.

I'm always very sad when this god awful case gets raked over in the news yet again. I'm from Merseyside originally and I remember it all too well. There is no public interest in this story at all, it's just media frenzy designed to sell newspapers and gain ratings.

you are totally wrong. There is huge public interest. if there wasn't then said papers wouldn't sell would they?

No, what I mean is there is no legitimate public interest. Not that the ghoulish public aren't interested.

I don't think that follows, Pennies. Women fall in love with convicted murderers regularly.

I disagree. The ovwhelming majority of the public felt the sentences weren't severe enough - the fact that one has reoffended and been returned to prison could be seen as a sign they were right. That would be legitimate interest.

We have no right imo.

I would be interested to know more about how everyone involved tried to help and rehabilitate him but clearly have no right to this information or any other about him.

Perhaps the time for the media to report and comment would be if/when Jack Straw makes the reason public. Right now it is pointless speculation (like most of the so-called news these days).

tortoise but most of those women know who they are falling in love with, this girl is, presumably unaware