"stated that the pair had been well-known to them for some years as exploiters of the 'age of crim respons"
As is every young petty criminal who was ever collared - are you going to chuck out the age limit in all cases because of this?
I said there was no reliable claim in relation to the killing - can you make such a claim?
"I still see no sympathy from you for that little boy or his family."
And I see not a glimmer of sympathy from you for the families of Venables or Taylor - or a glimmer of understanding - beyond them being two monsters.
How dare you suggest I have no sympathy for the families of all concerned?
This is a discussion on what should happen when two underage children commit a horrific crime. | have tried to make it clear that I don't know, but I have doubts that they should be incarcerated for life, and I find the idea of executing them as offensive - (if not more so), than what they did.
For mature adults to suggest the deliberate killing of two children, and to totally ignore that it might have something to do with the legacy that we have bequeathed is rather like removing embarrassing evidence of our own shortcomings.
And still nobody has come anywhere near tackling, or even acknowledging the general question of setting an age limit on criminal responsibility!!
Jim Carroll