killers of james bulger should not have been prosecuted??

[pregnochicklol]

Oh okay, because they're kids they should just be left to be a danger to everyone else?

Is this woman out of her mind?
Prison isn't just about punishment, it's about protecting others!

And I don't believe for one second that they didn't know it was wrong.
When I was a kid a bully (ring leader) tried to strangle my little sister, she was evil. But even her friends (aged around 7-9) realised her behaviour wasn't right made her release her. NORMAL Kids DO know what's right.

lol skihorse, but you were just an innocent child, don't you think we should blame your parents instead for you stealing sweets?

criminal

They were 10 year old children and they should have been hung, what a horrible opinion that is. Of course a 10 year old child knows right from wrong as does a 6 year old child, but whether they understood the full implications of their actions is another matter. When I was at uni we looked at this case amongst others and what struck most of us was of course the horrible nature of the crime, but also that the 2 boys were terrified 10 year olds. The cctv images in the shopping centre are sickening of course they are but in my opinion so is the film of the baying mob trying to tip over the prison vans carrying the 2 boys. Should they have been sent to adult court? In my opinion no

@ pregnochick It was my parents fault! They wouldn't give me any money to make my school project perfect so I was forced to go to WH Smith and steal a pen! The mean-minded b'stards! I got told off by the Chief Inspector, sent to bed with no dinner, had my riding lesson cancelled in the morning, made to go on a long bike ride with my dad and NO riding for a month.

Op also thinks 6 year olds should be subjected to 'good' beatings

duelingfanjo

I read the case, and I understand why there was more forgiveness for the kids who did that crime, as it says it was a game which got out of control and violent then they ran away in fear, very different to an entirely planned murder.
You seem to think bulgers killers should be forgiven, sure they can be forgiven.
But should they be free to put more kids at risk?

YAY Besom lets all turn on OP, Let's make her the new witch! :-D

Pregno, Presumably they have empathy because they were raised in a secure and loving home?

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that empathy does not always develop in children who have been subject to awful abuse.

If poor Baby Peter had survived his abuse; he may well have grown up to be a violent and abusive individual (pure speculation of course, we can never know). And had he committed a crime similar to those committed by his 'carers', the public would have been baying for his blood. too.

I think the responses in this thread are somewhat down to how I started it.
There is far less sympathy for the killers usually, but obviously with this being a forum we're all here for an argument and to test out alternative opinions.
I hate getting stuck fighting the 'general veiw' corner, it's boring!

Yeah they would Olifin, I agree.
But even if baby p turned out to be britain next serial killer, my sympathy for him would still be irrelevent.
As I've said, my concern is their danger to others.

The boys who committed the crime have been treated as if they didn't know what they did was wrong. They weren't sent to an adult prison, they have had resources lavished on them. So they were treated as if the age of criminal responsibilty was more than 10.

Despite a conviction in an adult court they don't actually seem to have had any punishment.

"I do agree that there parents should be held accountable. Not entirely sure how but still accountable."

STG I don't completely agree with this. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) but the one who has had his licence revoked came from quite a stable background. His lawyer couldn't lay blame at his parents and exclaimed that the boy was supposed to have been extremely well-balanced. He was actually on his way to school to pick up the class guinea pig for the holidays when he met the other one (who had come from a quite disturbed family).

"most kids who've been brought up with good moral guidance would understand the implications of the acts committed against James Bulger, but we have know way of knowing how they were perceived by these two boys who had had no such guidance throughout their lives."

Don't agree streaky, we know the details of what happened, they knew they were causing him pain, they knew exactly what they were doing. However, my mom who lectures in mental health, firmly believes they are sociopaths or psychopaths, and that this removes their conscience so that they actually don't care. She believes they should have been hospitalised. I do agree with you saying they "needed appropriate help and support to deal with the aftermath".

"Adults also commit horrific murders but never receive such public vilification."

It was precisely because they were children it caused such an uproar. Nobody can imagine their ten year old doing this. And I don't doubt that if an adult did this they would have received the same if not more attention. It was a particularly vile crime. But yes, it wasn't necessary for the world to know their name. That didn't help at all. Neither did revealing their pictures.

"You seem to think bulgers killers should be forgiven, sure they can be forgiven.
But should they be free to put more kids at risk? "

I think that for anyone who is not directly involved with the case 'forgiveness' is not an issue. I think they should have been treated with compassion, I think they should have (and hopefully were) been given as much care and treatment as it took to successfully rehabilitate them into everyday life. I think their identities should have been protected from the very start, I think that having failed to do that the courts were right to give them new identities.

Am also appalled by the idea that anyone would think that a child deserves a 'good beating'.

"As I've said, my concern is their danger to others. "

which is why they have been monitored all the way through their release so that they won't be and if they are they will be taken back into custody. You think that hanging and beating people (children in this case) protects others from any future possible wrong doing. I think that's a very sad and uneducated view to have, though I do understand there are plenty of people like you who really do believe it's the right way to deal with criminals.

from pregnochickol -'I actually do think some people are plain evil, but that's partly because I was married to a very evil person who I had to flee from, I knew him very well and I knew his mother was also evil and he suffered at such an age where I guess it effected him so massively he just couldn't have normal empathy for others as an adult'

does that not make the opposite argument?
he clearly lacked empathy for being brought up by someone who also lacked it, these problems run for generations
if society does not care or intervene early enough we all pay the price, in more ways than one

'normal' children can't even imagine doing the things those boys did they were clearly profoundly damaged

I think the only person entitled to feel a blinding rage is James Bulger's mother

as for the rest of us maybe reflecting on what kind of society allows for children to be damaged to that extend may be more useful

It was wrong to try them in an adult court. There's something very disturbing at thinking of grown adults trying to turn over the prison van - people who clearly struggle to distinguish right from wrong themselves but then judge 10yos for not being able to do it.

However, of course Venables and Thompson had to be apprehended, held accountable in a way appropriate to their age and understanding of consequences, and kept safe so they weren't free to harm anyone else. And given every support and chance of rehabilitation.

We have no idea why this man was recalled, but it does seem he has disclosed his true identity to others, not once but repeatedly. Suggests he is finding it difficult to cope which is dangerous for him and quite possibly for others too.

Yes there are plenty of people with my veiw and I'm arguing on all of their behalf, it's tiring!
I wish someone would take over. Arguing from an alternative veiw is far more interesting than constantly stating the obvious.
It's a common veiw that people who commit horrific murders should be 'taken out' to prevent them doing so again if nothing else.

I have love, sympathy and forgiveness for many criminals, doesn't effect how I think they should be treated.
Prison isn't about 'payback' in my veiw. It's about protecting others from them.

pregnochick

You feel differently about the case in Norway because it was a game that got out of hand while the Bulger murder was 'entirely planned'. How on earth do you know that? None of us know what was going through the heads of those boys. It is entirely possible that it was a 'game' that got out of hand rather than a premeditated crime.

Wasn't it said that Venables and/or Thompson spent many hours watching violent films and playing violent computer games? On its own, of course this wouldn't cause a child to murder another child but it's just another factor to take into account. I know from working in Secondary schools that there are plenty of young lads who talk very enthusiastically about violence and war, thanks to the amount of time they spend on their X-boxes. For children who are raised in a particular set of circumstances; there can be a great deal of blurring between what is real (and therefore has consequences) and what is not.

I think hang 'em and flog 'em is an easy view to hold as you can always adopt a position of moral authority - that you care more for the victims than someone with a different approach.

Olifin ask others whether they feel differently about that case and ours, then ask them why.

Well pregno, I am...I'm asking you!

Peronally, I don't see a great deal of difference, other than the age of the children who committed the crime. The outcome is the same: two children murdering a younger child.

Pregnochick - I am not 'turning on you'. I repeated what you said word for word and expressed shock at your opinion (in other words I very strongly disagree with what you said and I do not think it is remotely acceptable to give six year olds good beatings).

Besom
I don't want to get into a serious debate about a half joking comment.
Whether a child should recieve a beating themselves as a direct response to them stoning a small child is debatable.
Many people being brutally honest I think would agree.
I don't want to get into a big debate about coporal punishment now and be the one playing the pro-beating corner.
It's an entirely whole new discussion to be had.
I think coporal punishment can be a good thing under the right circumstances.
I tyhink the laws against it are to protect children who are abused by it when their parents are using it in the wrong way, so I agree with laws.