James Bulger - New Revelations

[SchadenfreudePersonified]

Just watching this - wondered if anyone else was interested in discussing it

John Venables mother seemed the better of the two. She attended the police interviews with JV, it seems that she told her son to tell the truth to the police, ultimately leading to his confession. In the tape she seemed distraught like any mother would.
Listening to JV confess is really disturbing, very hard to listen to. Almost wish I hadn’t.

It seems that Thompson was streetwiseof tte two and Venables easily lead. I think it was Thompson’s idea to get a kid and go to the shopping centre, things obviously escalated from there.
In 2010, Venables was working at a restaurant in Cheshire and started outing himself to friends after drinking.Someone took pictures of him (or are alleged to be him) and were posted on the internet.
For his own safety, his probation officer rushed around to his place and found Venables with a laptop which contained child porn. That lead to his arrest and conviction.
I’ve also read Venables prior to this got into a fight and was admitted to hospital. The guy who he had a fight with had no idea who he was.
Venables was recalled back into prison earlier this year, for child pornography. I believe he got 4 years.

If you look at studies of brain scans and psychopaths though actually it is totally possible to be a perfectly decent, law abiding person but still have the brain abnormalities of a psychopath.
Theres a really interesting neuroscientist called James Fallon who worked on this, his findings were surprising and very interesting.
Basically it appears that although nature can make you a psychopath in a neurological sense, nurture can almost save you from acting on it.

That's it though, isn't it Josie. Many people have disadvantages (of every type - physical, neurological, mental ), but don't allow them to destroy the lives others (or of themselves).

There may be a potential for anti-social behaviour (not necessarily murder) there, but it won't necessarily be fulfilled if "nurture" doesn't confirm "nature". We can't (and nor should we want to) lock people up on the off-chance they will commit a crime, but where such crimes are committed, and the perpetrator claims that it was beyond their control, then this should lead to a heavier sentence, not a lighter one.

I think it complicates matters somewhat. Particularly in the case of children. If upbringing is to blame should thresholds for neglectful/abusive families be lowered? Currently your child has to be at very severe risk before SS will even get involved.

In the case of adults these people are actually brain damaged, worse, they are likely brain damaged people who suffered abuse in childhood, possibly they could have been taught not to be that way but they weren't and thats not their fault, however they are dangerous individuals and rehabilitation is unlikely.

With JV, I think he displays some traits of being a psychopath and diagnosed or not the minute he commited another offence relating to a child or violence he should be locked up for life as he has proven he is not capable of change despite the most intensive therapy.

Ironically there is scientific proof that neglect/abuse of babies and children causes brain damage. So again society needs to look at itself...

Shouting at young children stops their brains developing as it should

JV family had the appearance of being a much more MC family but what was recognised is that the dynamics weren't warm and loving etc. Also was it V or T that was threatened with scissors to have his penis chopped off?

Even if you go begging for help to be a better parent there is no help out there IME!

I believe MRIs carried out on people who were placed in Romanian orphanages from birth showed 4 in 5 suffered some form of brain damage or brain activity that was not neuro typical.

The belief is that this was from severe neglect and possibly malnourishment from a very young age.
A large amount of these orphans suffer from attachment disorder as adults.

Should we lock people up for life who are damaged as a result of a poor upbringing?
Or do we have an obligation to at least attempt rehabilitation?

If it was a child who had been physically beaten as a child causing brain damage and the case was highly publicised at the time. I think people would feel more empathetic if they murdered someone in adulthood than if it was a child who suffered the same type of neuro damage due to abuse where the brain damage was not directly caused physically and there was no publicity.

Children can't actually be psychopaths. They can be diagnosed with callous and unemotional traits that lead to adult psychopathy.

It is true that not all psychopaths murder but nurture is not the reason. A psychopath could have the best upbringing in the world and still go on to kill just because it took their fancy or because it was of benefit to them.

The whole point in a psychopath is they simply don't care. They don't have empathy, they act on impulse and don't care about the repercussions. You can't cure it, whether they become a surgeon or a murderer is mainly out of the parents control. There is usually a sexual element too which is why female psychopaths don't tend to kill as often and go more under the radar.

That being said there has been some sucsess with rehabilitating children with callous and unemotional traits through positive reinforcement. But there is no way of knowing whether those kids would actually have become adult psychopaths or just dysfunctional adults without the intervention.

I don't think we know enough about either RT or JV to say if either is a psychopath. But RT has seemingly got on with his life and stayed out of trouble, so it's more likely he was just a product of his environment. It seems quite telling to me that RTs older brothers were abusive to him and JB was of the same age and appearance as RTs younger brother.

Is JV reoffending because he's a psychopath or because he's disturbed by what he did? Who knows, but he's a pedophile which there is no cure, so in my view should be locked up for life. But that's not government policy.

Children are never diagnosed as having psychopathy, because it is simply too early to be sure. But some are.

The crime was awful. But I agree that there were 3 victims in this case. I can’t imagine my 7 year old being so scared of coming home that he would roam the streets. I am appalled that there was no major case review - the school, social services

• they should have all been accountable. No one ever really examined WHY it happened. I found it interesting that RT’s youngest brother was the same age and looked a bit like JB.

I would like to know what happened to those 2 x 10 or 11 year olds who beat a small boy almost to death in the north of England - about 10 to 15 years after the Bulger case. Their names were not released. Good. I think if the names were going to be released there needs to be a reason - to really examine why on earth 2 x 10 year olds killed. There is a part of me that wonders whether they just didn’t know what to do with poor JB...and didn’t know how to stop it.

I read about the Shanda sharer case after lurking on this thread and watched the interviews with the girls involved

I find it so hard to understand why children younger than these women are seen as just simply being evil and these women are nearly all living their lives again in society with people saying they deserve to do so.

It's a horrific crime and I think society does share some blame that two minors were able to murder poor James.

The Shanda sharer case girls would have been far more aware of their actions and consequences yet society has somewhat forgiven them. If I was Denise I would never be able to or want to forgive but naming them then and giving them anonymity after I think took away any possibility of her being able to see any good come from their time inside whereas Shanda sharer's mum has had the opportunity to see something come from the girls. She donated a dog for Melinda Loveless to train in Shanda's memory. I don't think I could do it but if she found healing in it in any form that was her right. I really think it must be horrific to not know who your child's killers are but know they have been released

But Denise and Ralph did know who they were - or at least saw them. I think they are named in court - but the media can’t report the names. And if Denise and Ralph had named them then they would have been in contempt of court and likely imprisoned.

Trials aren’t conducted with anonymity.

Oh I thought she doesn't know who they are now?? I'm sure ages ago I read something about her being scared her children would meet them

What I mean is - the Bulger family knew exactly who they were at the trial. There was no need to name them afterwards. The judge did so - I think - because he wanted their backgrounds to be known and so people might be able to understand how it had happened. But I don’t think that has happened.

Shandra case is interesting - a different level of forgiveness.

Didn't Venebles break his license by going near Denise Fergus at one point? I'm sure I read that somewhere.

I do find it strange that the adults in these boys lives weren’t held to account. The parents, school, social services. Why wasn’t any blame put on these too?
James parents did of course see the boys in court. I also remember reading somewhere that Densie got a tip off about the location of RT. She went to the area and saw him from a distance, but was too consumed with emotion to do anything.

The Shander Sharer case was terrible. Sadly there’s been a few cases like that in the USA.
I seem to recall also in the UK in the early 90s, a teenage girl was taken by a group of teenagers, beaten, and left for dead in a field. I can’t remember her name, but think one of the gang was released recently after a long sentence.
Two brothers in about 2008/2009 also lured two other boys into some woods and almost beat them to death. This was in Rotherham I seem to recall. They both got 8 years in a secure home, similar to JV and RT.

I will always remember Damilola Taylor and the images of a happy little boy walking from the library.

@JediJim the 2 brothers thing was near Doncaster. It was very disturbing.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/22/edlington-brothers-jailed-torture-boys

Damilola Taylor, another sad case. So depressing to see these children’s young lives taken so unnecessarily.

I thought it was interesting how one of the staff who had worked at the centre where Robert Thompson was held said she felt the crime was motivated by jealousy the boys both had of their younger siblings and they projected it in an extreme way onto James.

That brothers attack was horrific kitten .

Again, the boys' home life was described as "toxic" and "chaotic" - How horribly easy it is to instil cruelty into a child, and to teach them to detach themselves from the feelings and emotions of others - and of themselves.

The two boys that they tortured and abused (and almost killed) will probably never fully get over their ordeal.

I thought it was interesting how one of the staff who had worked at the centre where Robert Thompson was held said she felt the crime was motivated by jealousy the boys both had of their younger siblings and they projected it in an extreme way onto James.

That does seem possible. Thompson's youngest brother Baby Ben was about the same age as James and had a different father than the rest of the boys - after several years basically drunk and checked out Ann had sobered up, become more stable and found a new partner. Bobby was apparently very helpful with Ben but it's not hard to imagine a huge amount of buried resentment that on straightening out a bit, instead of paying attention to her many existing children Ann just had another. And Venables was thought to be jealous of all the time and attention occupied by his SN siblings.

That said, it's pretty disturbing that someone who had contact with one or more of the boys in a professional capacity is willing to violate that professionalism for headlines.

That said, it's pretty disturbing that someone who had contact with one or more of the boys in a professional capacity is willing to violate that professionalism for headlines.

It's disgusting! The same as that woman (was she a probation officer, social worker - can't remember?) who "befriended" Fred West in order to get him to speak about his vile crimes.

She sold her "story" to the papers - no thought of what it might do to the families of the victims.

But the thing is, the people who had contact with those boys in the secure homes can say what they want, without challenge. Neither Thompson nor Venables will ever be able to confirm or deny anything.
Always thought how sad it is that Ralph and Denise went their separate ways. I can imagine a tragedy taking a toll on a marriage ( like Doreen and Neville Lawrence) but they seem to fight their own battles seperate from eachother. They do share a son together who was born after James murder. Denise set up a charity, I don’t think Ralph is involved in this. I’m not knocking him, just saying.
I’ve found this year that this case has haunted me rather a lot, with my daughter being the same age now that James was and the various documentaries that have marked the 25th year. No good can ever come of it can it...

Just catching up on this. I read Ralph’s book and was in pieces.

Lots of things were wrong in the whole trail.

What concerns me about the programme is, on all sides, we’ve got solicitors, family liaison officer and secure care home managers on the tv discussing the case. That feels wrong to me. I’d be sacked if I talked about my workplace and co workers on the telly