Bulger Murderer sent back to clink

[Pigeonho]

I see nothing wrong in wishing those of the ilk of Roy Whiting, Ian HUntley and Venables/Thompson a slow and painful death, nothing whatsoever considering what they did. I promise you something though, if anything like this happened to any of my kids or family, I would have no hesitation, given the opportunity, in going to town on the culprit in a room full of marvellous, sharp objects. Only if it was a person as evil as those already mentioned, that is. I saw a video from Romania which was a family being legally allowed to carry out the execution of those found guilty of raping their daughter/granddaughter/neice. I see nothing wrong with that either. What does that make me, seeing as i'm already 'disturbed' and 'strange'....

It would make you no better than those who had committed the act in the first place.

Maybe, but as a victim of someone capable of such evil, it would sure make me feel better. See I go off the husband of Sara Payne, how he became emotionally crippled in the months following his little daughters death. As the press focussed on him, you could see him becoming more and more haunted of the death his girl had met. In those months whilst torment was twisted inside him, put him, Roy Whiting in a room with a locked door and I guarantee one outcome, the latters death. He would fully deserve that death as much as Mr Payne would deserve the opportunity. That is how I see a fit and proper sentence for peopple capable of such evil, but I promise you something Cheesy, it certainly does not make me strange.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

it was venables who displayed the remorse from the off, he even cried out during the case and was uncontrollable to the point of hysterics, however thompson only revealed his culpability during his release hearing in 2001.

I'm confused here Zin, he showed remorse yet he instigated it too ?

And this notion that venables was merely following thompson is frankly laughable. He was psycho-analyzed throughout the case and was evaluated as having a Goffman Complex, hence the breakdown in court and being the 1st to proverbially crack. The CCTV surveillance also dispelled the myth, both were calculated and clearly had Venables directing thompson in the act. FACT

The initial act of him cracking was fundamental to the reading of the case, his remorse was that of a child who spills the beans at the 1st opportunity, the complexity of the kid and the psychological profile was one of being a very calculated individual even at 10.... his laying of the blame on thompson solely was not an admission of guilt, but one that displayed a justification (in his mind) of the act. Thompsons closure was a delayed reaction, one that is more accepted by scholars as the natural reaction to such events.

 

[Dubai Blue]

As I said above to another poster, I would be in agreement with the death penalty never coming back if I knew that monstors like these 2 and the Roy Whitings of this world were in such hellish, miserable conditions they wished they could have that death sentence as a way out.

You keep comparing these two children to adult rapists and serial killers. Surely you must be able to see that there is a clear difference. Yes, I agree that Venables and Thompson should have been locked away longer, and yes, I agree that a cold, calculating middle-aged child killer should be kept in the bare minimum of conditions for the rest of his days as he is clearly beyond hope. But do you not see that there is a slight glimmer of a chance that a 10 year old might just be able to be brought back from the abyss?

People who go out and kill for fun, which is seems venables did, should be given the death penalty. What good is he alive if he wants to takes someone's life purposely. After his quick spell In prison he could have killed any other innocent person. People would think again about going out to kill if they knew they would be killed, it can only happen when the judge is 110% the killer, but the monsters deserve it

If we're playing a game of ifs and coulds, here are some of my own: What if the other boy, Thompson, has been fully rehabilitated from the seriously disturbed child he was when he committed this horrendous crime? He could be living a perfectly quiet life now as a completely different person to the one he was when he was just 10 years old. He could be contributing significantly to society and never have even committed a traffic offence since release. In such a case, would you still think he should have been executed? And if so, why?

The state can't go around executing 10 year old children, and anyone who thinks that it should needs to join us in the real world. And if you accept that you can't kill 10 year old children, you also accept that they will inevitably be released at some point. If you keep them locked in a tiny cell for 24 hours a day with no contact with anyone and feed them stale bread, they're going to come out as complete and utter mentalists. It would be like unleashing a caged animal onto the unsuspecting public. If you really think that such conditions are going to serve any sort of rehabilitating purpose then you really haven't got a clue. People don't sit in solitary confinement for 10 years repenting their sins and promising that they'll be a better person when they get out; they go mad.

Treat people like Roy Whiting however you want, I really couldn't care less. He should never see the light of day again. But to automatically write off the lives of two ten year olds without a second thought is utterly barbaric in my opinion.

And the final point about the death penalty serving as a deterrent has been proven on so many occasions to be entirely false.

 

[stony]

The initial act of him cracking was fundamental to the reading of the case, his remorse was that of a child who spills the beans at the 1st opportunity, the complexity of the kid and the psychological profile was one of being a very calculated individual even at 10.... his laying of the blame on thompson solely was not an admission of guilt, but one that displayed a justification (in his mind) of the act. Thompsons closure was a delayed reaction, one that is more accepted by scholars as the natural reaction to such events.

If they knew the type of person he was, then it begs the question, why was he released ?

I could understand(although not agree with) it if they thought he was genuinely repentant and would pose no further danger to society. From what you say though, it sounds like they had him sussed for a cold calculating psycho from the start.

 

[Pigeonho]

As I said above to another poster, I would be in agreement with the death penalty never coming back if I knew that monstors like these 2 and the Roy Whitings of this world were in such hellish, miserable conditions they wished they could have that death sentence as a way out.

You keep comparing these two children to adult rapists and serial killers. Surely you must be able to see that there is a clear difference. Yes, I agree that Venables and Thompson should have been locked away longer, and yes, I agree that a cold, calculating middle-aged child killer should be kept in the bare minimum of conditions for the rest of his days as he is clearly beyond hope. But do you not see that there is a slight glimmer of a chance that a 10 year old might just be able to be brought back from the abyss?

People who go out and kill for fun, which is seems venables did, should be given the death penalty. What good is he alive if he wants to takes someone's life purposely. After his quick spell In prison he could have killed any other innocent person. People would think again about going out to kill if they knew they would be killed, it can only happen when the judge is 110% the killer, but the monsters deserve it

If we're playing a game of ifs and coulds, here are some of my own: What if the other boy, Thompson, has been fully rehabilitated from the seriously disturbed child he was when he committed this horrendous crime? He could be living a perfectly quiet life now as a completely different person to the one he was when he was just 10 years old. He could be contributing significantly to society and never have even committed a traffic offence since release. In such a case, would you still think he should have been executed? And if so, why?

The state can't go around executing 10 year old children, and anyone who thinks that it should needs to join us in the real world. And if you accept that you can't kill 10 year old children, you also accept that they will inevitably be released at some point. If you keep them locked in a tiny cell for 24 hours a day with no contact with anyone and feed them stale bread, they're going to come out as complete and utter mentalists. It would be like unleashing a caged animal onto the unsuspecting public. If you really think that such conditions are going to serve any sort of rehabilitating purpose then you really haven't got a clue. People don't sit in solitary confinement for 10 years repenting their sins and promising that they'll be a better person when they get out; they go mad.

Treat people like Roy Whiting however you want, I really couldn't care less. He should never see the light of day again. But to automatically write off the lives of two ten year olds without a second thought is utterly barbaric in my opinion.

And the final point about the death penalty serving as a deterrent has been proven on so many occasions to be entirely false.

Err, he's just been rearrested for 'serious offences'. I'd say that proves the punishment they got, failed. And the Whiting comparison isn't a comparison of the crime, its a comparisson of evil.

 

[Dubai Blue]

Err, he's just been rearrested for 'serious offences'. I'd say that proves the punishment they got, failed.

Sorry, silly me, I thought there were two killers. I must be thinking of a different case then.

 

[Pigeonho]

Err, he's just been rearrested for 'serious offences'. I'd say that proves the punishment they got, failed.

Sorry, silly me, I thought there were two killers. I must be thinking of a different case then.

Thats a bit silly now, isn't it? Unless of course you know exactly the roles each played in the murder? Wouldn't matter if there were 10 killers involved, the fact is one of them has commited offenses serious enough to land himself back in the can, and the fact also is that he had NO punishment between 1994 and 2001, nothing exceept mollicoddles and playstations, (going off reports), and now he's back inside after, (again off reports), acting like a twat since his release. Put it this way, he's hardly become a model member of society now has he, and what you were saying is to give them a chance, but that chance has failed miserably and it doesn't matter if its only 1 of them who's gone back, because you don't know what the other is up to. They served a total of 7 years for this crime, all of which were in what are basically care homes for naughty boys. They should have served that time up until their 18th birthday in a hard, horrible borstal, then into full nick with the big boys. Not released after 7 years!!! Its failed, simple as that.

 

[Ducado]

This is a good and interesting topic

But can I request that those that know intimate details of the case and the people involved, do not post names on here, it is an open forum that anyone can view, you may be compromising someone's career

 

[Scottyboi]

Shank shank you scum bag not long untill it all comes out.

 

[DTeacher]

This is a good and interesting topic

But can I request that those that know intimate details of the case and the people involved, do not post names on here, it is an open forum that anyone can view, you may be compromising someone's career

Or life.

 

[Anonymous]

Shank shank you scum bag not long untill it all comes out.

And if it does, there will never be the possibility of a fair trial and should he be guilty of anything he will get away with it purely because of the morbid curiosity & desire for revenge of so called civilsed people.

 

[mackenzie]

Knew the thread would turn into this.

It always does.

 

[Scottyboi]

Shank shank you scum bag not long untill it all comes out.

And if it does, there will never be the possibility of a fair trial and should he be guilty of anything he will get away with it purely because of the morbid curiosity & desire for revenge of so called civilsed people.

There will never be justice for what they did. Even locking them up for the rest of their life's. Maybe its human nature for some people to want to see scum like him die?

 

[mammutly]

Knew the thread would turn into this.

It always does.

I remember you saying so about 35 pages ago and you were not wrong!

There has been some worthwhile debate though.

 

[Anonymous]

And if it does, there will never be the possibility of a fair trial and should he be guilty of anything he will get away with it purely because of the morbid curiosity & desire for revenge of so called civilsed people.

There will never be justice for what they did. Even locking them up for the rest of their life's. Maybe its human nature for some people to want to see scum like him die?

There's a lot wrong with human nature, and this is one of those things mate. He needs a fair trial, not just for his sake but for the rest of us too.

 

[Anonymous]

Knew the thread would turn into this.

It always does.

I remember you saying so about 35 pages ago and you were not wrong!

There has been some worthwhile debate though.

By & large I think so too.

 

[shootmeifipost10k]

All this about being realeased early reminds me of a converstaion I had with a family member after she took early retirement from her job which was at top secure hospital.A job which she did for over 30 years and she loved doing and would not want to leave. I would say she was at the near top of her proffession in phsyciatry and very highy thought of.
I was told that there is that much money thrown into the system these days with the advancement in treatments,modern medicine councelling that there as to be positive result shown or what would be the point..against this person more experienced and probably better judgement patients were being put through programmes for release or to be moved to less secure places in readiness for realease.
In her words the system was turning into a numbers game and the way she put it was that people have to be released or the numbers wouldn't add up and it was turning into risk reward, now this was about ten years ago and I'm sure the number of people working in this field as risen so as the number of people being released when they should to justify these jobs risen with them.
Maybe modern medicine and practises do work,obviously we only get to hear about the people let out who reoffend but I'd sure like to know the numbers.

 

[Scottyboi]

There will never be justice for what they did. Even locking them up for the rest of their life's. Maybe its human nature for some people to want to see scum like him die?

There's a lot wrong with human nature, and this is one of those things mate. He needs a fair trial, not just for his sake but for the rest of us too.

Hell of alot of scary people being caught these days I cannot see proper prisons being that easy.
I know what you mean if he was ever hung ect, everytime someone commited a murder it would have to be the same.

 

[Unknown_Genius]

If we had prisons where you knew conditions were hellish, I would fully agree with you, but the reports of playstations, facebook, phones and 3 nice meals a day suggest prison, other than being able to walk down to the corner shop, is no different to being at home in many cases. For me hellish conditions mean no segregation or protection, a shared toilet, a cell which houses 4, and a small cell at that, 3 very basic meals a day, no visitor rights, no phonecall rights, nothing other than the most miserable life possible, always with the threat of a raping, a beating and a good fucking hiding.....if that was promised for the most EXTREME, (Mighty Quinn), cases, well then I would rather see them live like that than be put to death too.

If prison is so soft then why don't you go out now and do a bank job, sort yourself out financially for life and you'll only serve a few years in a holiday like prison. Makes sense to me. Except, you know, deep down that prison is far from a nice place. I've visited several and they're fucking horrible places.

I agree. Denying someone their freedom is a pretty big thing. Imagine waking up on a nice sunny morning, and not being allowed to stroll down to the newsagents for a paper and maybe a chocolate bar, or not being able to meet your best mate for a pint out in the sunshine or for a game of footy, not being able to see that movie you really want to in the Cinema, not being able to eat the food you want.... The list goes on and on. No amount of playstations or Iphones can make up for not being free. I also believe our criminal justice system is a joke, the sentences are lenient, and that prisons maybe could do without the luxuries, but its not the soft punishment thats often made out in the media.

 

[mackenzie]

I remember you saying so about 35 pages ago and you were not wrong!

There has been some worthwhile debate though.

By & large I think so too.

Yes, there has.

Interesting to see some other opinions. I have to now confess that perhaps Venables needed some some discipline in his life, rather than being released at 18 (such a young age really).

But I still do not agree with the fact that two children were tried as adults. They were damaged beyond belief, even before they murdered James Bulger.

Let's hope that something good comes out of this whole debacle.

Even if it is that scary one...Thompson. He was MUCH more the instigator than Venables was, but he survives in a better way?