James Bulger: The Trial

[determinedtomakethiswork]

Is anyone watching this? I remember it so clearly, even though it was so long ago. I live not far from Liverpool and it was all everyone was talking about for a very long time.

Sorry, I meant to say, it's on channel 5.

What channel is it on please?

I'm Watching. How do the defence team do their jobs? Speechless that they tried to get these monsters off. Smacks of egos and it's seems like it just a 'game' to them. Sickening.

Of course they had to try to get them off; we can't have lawyers deciding on guilt or innocence before the trial. Everyone deserves a fair trial, and in fact, the better the legal team, the better for everyone, as if they'd had a robust defence, there is less chance that there would need to be a retrial etc.

Know it's on but can't watch it, too upsetting, remember it so well.

@MapleSyrupWaffles I understand that, I just can't imagine it in this case.
The overwhelming evidence that was presented by the prosecution was undeniable, yet they looked for loopholes/excuses in order to 'get them off'.
As I said, I can't imagine being able to do that

They are ensuring the law is applied correctly, if there are loop holes in the law then of course they will use them. Their job is to get the least possible sentence for their client.

Then 'the law is an ass'!

who do you want to decide if the evidence is undeniable though? It has to go through a proper process. It could have been that one child coerced the other or whatever; their defence has to explore that option and try to show that their client might not have been as involved, as otherwise, they've just made the decision themselves that the child is guilty.

Do you think we should have trials that are just the prosecution then?

Yes I remember this when it happened, I was 10 myself. In my grown up years I have sadly learned more about what happened and it haunts me so much thinking about that little boy, more so because I’m a mum. Don’t know if I can watch it tbh.

@MapleSyrupWaffles yes you're right,I I guess I was just getting distressed at the subject matter.

@MadamWhiteleigh no of course not.

shall we change the way all cases are heard just because of ones like the Bulger one? The defence can just come in and say ‘yeah I think they’re guilty too’ and we just convict.

It’s not done to ‘get them off’ it’s there to make sure that the case is correct so that it’s water tight and then they can’t turn round later and have it overturned. Evidence and witnesses need to be challenged.

Everyone should have a good defence. You see what happens in America where particularly poor people seem to be convicted on nothing. I wouldn’t want to see that here.

Everyone is entitled to a defence and actually the ‘cab rank’ rule means barristers cannot turn down a case save for very limited circumstances and certainly not due to their own view on the matter. Making out like they did their job for ego is very unfair.

Yes, the subject matter is certainly distressing, and I'm sure it must be hard for the defence teams at times to deal with that - but I imagine they reconcile what they're doing by the belief in the legal system working best when everyone has a fair chance and a strong defence. Even if they have personal feelings about a particular case, they can set that aside in order to make sure that the system works as it should. And that might come across as seeming like they don't care or are playing games, but ideally it comes from a trust in the way the law works and their role in individual trials is just part of that bigger picture. And it has to work the same for everyone, whether the evidence seems clear cut or more doubtful, as otherwise the decision is in the wrong hands.

@MapleSyrupWaffles thanks for your replies/explanations.

Barristers dont get a choice as to which cases they get.

I'm watching it on + 1.

I can't believe this happened 30 years ago, I remember it like it was yesterday.

I was 13 at the time, but my younger sibling was 10, and was just as shocked as me that children of their age could carry out such a wicked act.

RIP James Bulger.

Great posts @MapleSyrupWaffles (I can't use the hidden gratitude feature as I'm on my phone!)

The whole situation is so sad.
Poor James.

I also to a degree have sadness for the 10 year olds. They committed such an evil crime but when you look at their home lives especially Robert Thomson's you just think what an awful life for a 10 year old.
Obviously not an excuse for what he did.
The whole situation is just very very sad.

I read the book that Jamie's dad wrote . It's the most horrific thing I've ever read. I couldn't watch the show.

I worked with young offenders, which some have also done crimes like this. Watching them laugh and joke and open xmas presents, is one of the hardest parts of the job knowing they have done something so awful! I often wonder how we treat them so nice and laugh and joke with them BUT we get paid to treat them all the same like anyone else that has to work with them

I watched this. I also remember the headlines at the time of their conviction when finally their faces were published.
I think the Sun had “Evil” as the headline. They were 10 year old boys who had done something awful but I don’t believe a child is evil nor a monster. I think they were extremely damaged. I also know someone who knew someone who had worked with one of them whilst in the youth detention centre. The child’s background was horrific. Yet none of that could come out at the trial.

They should never have been tried in an adult setting with all that formality. Totally wrong. The whole situation was tragic and awful - for all 3 children involved.

I think about 10 years after this there was another similar case involving a 10 or 11 year old boy who had tried to murder another child (unsuccessfully). Thankfully judge kept child’s name anonymous. There needs to be more understanding of why children commit these terrible crimes.