BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables

Subject: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:07 PM

Currently a documentary on TV. I am finding it a difficult thing to watch but it is very important. When 2 x 10 year old boys commit such an awful act who is to blame? I honestly don't know but, judging from first hand evidence, the lads didn't know any better.

Very, very sad indeed.

MP

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Paul Burke
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:15 PM

Daily Mail wants clear cut villains,

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:20 PM

All the hysterical reaction suggesting that the child perpetrators of this crime were somehow innately evil and far worse than adults who do similar things far more frequently, left me fuming. As far as I recall, at least one of the boys involved had an abusive father. My view is hat it is most likely that they were behaving no differently to the way in which dogs which get kicked about also tend to behave. Tragic circumstances and consequences. But the fact that Bulger was murdered by children in no way makes his or his family's suffering, or public approbation of such acts, any greater than that of the far greater number of children who are tortured, raped and murdered by adults.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:26 PM

Hmm, what could the greatest good of the greatest number possibly require?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:31 PM

Not sure, Richard. But I am sure that we cannot solve it here. Although some will inevetably try. Sadly:-(

MP

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:34 PM

Depends on the society Richard I suppose. But personally I don't believe that Utilitarian principles (if that is what you are invoking as you appear to be) are innately moral or indeed necessarily for the common or greater 'good'. For example, public hangings and stonings are known to make many people very happy, indeed often irrespective of such small matters as the certain guilt of the one being publicly executed.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:44 PM

"the certain guilt of the one being publicly executed."

Considering how many were actually executed, I'm sure there must have been more than one.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:48 PM

You can search their backgrounds for excuses all you want, many people came from broken homes and suffered at the hands of violent parents and turn out to be admirable responsible adults.

The truth is, they were bad evil bastards and should be hounded for the rest of their pitiful lives for what they did to that innocent child.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Paul Burke
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 06:53 PM

Richie Black shgows once more that he's sen by some as an an emotional cripple. Some kids survive. Fine, Some don't. We#re talking about the latter.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 07:04 PM

Yes of course, that is the problem. Their fathers never took them to see a football match, they never tasted steak until they were eleven, their mothers suffered depression, blah fuckin blah.

The fact is, both bastards terrorised the neighbourhood they lived in, they told neighbours they could not touch them due to their age, they beat this child senseless and admitted they placed him on a railway track so he would be cut in half.

Their location should be exposed, they should be hounded and hopefully experience a meeting with local community representatives on a dark night.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 07:20 PM

Compare and contrast Richie, this is what smart countries do:

The story of little Silgie and her 6 yr. old killers

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 21 Apr 11 - 07:57 PM

You should pass that link onto the Bulger family, let me know how you get on.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 11 - 03:20 PM

No doubt, in the good old days of capital punishment Little Richie would have been at the head of the queue to volunteer to swing on their feet to make up the necessary weight!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 22 Apr 11 - 03:29 PM

This raises the enormously complex questions about culpability, blame and punishment. All one can say is that such people are dangerous to the rest of us, so some form of exclusion, in prison, psychiatric hospital, secure accommodation or whatever is essential. Those who work later towards having them released face a huge responsibility. Will they continue to be a danger? How can anyone know? No matter how much one pities these lads,(and I for one do) we can't risk freeing them unless we're sure they're not a threat, and we'll never be sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 22 Apr 11 - 03:36 PM

I have a daughter who's a paediatrics consultant in child protection, one son who's a fairly senior probation officer, and another who's a prison governor. I'm quite happy to let them get on with the job without interference from me, as I know they know a lot more about the subject than I do.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 22 Apr 11 - 04:08 PM

None of their professions are easy, they have to remain impartial at all times, despite seeing and having to deal with victims and perpetrators. I doubt any of you would find such a position suitable for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Boho
Date: 22 Apr 11 - 09:02 PM

My earlier post got deleted, I guess because I forgot to sign in, although I did claim the post shortly after.

What it said was that several scientific studies have shown that abuse and neglect in childhood can have damaging effects on the structure and chemistry of the developing brain.

"Several studies now document that abuse damages key brain structures such as the cortex, which is associated with rational thinking, and the hippocampus, which helps process memories and emotions. Both brain regions are critical for learning."

How child abuse and neglect damage the brain

Some studies have apparently shown significantly lower scores for empathy in abused children.

This could be relevant at least in Thompson's case.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 02:49 AM

"I'm quite happy to let them get on with the job without interference from me, as I know they know a lot more about the subject than I do."
Sounds like good sense to me.
Threads like this always bring out of the woodwork those ready to incite mob rule to drag the prisoners out of the jailhouse and string them up to the nearest tree.
Whatever these children did, the law says they have to be dealt with according to their age; the alternative being to place our legal system in the hands of the scabloid press and its adherents.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 12:06 PM

Ah ~ diddums ~ children. Sweet ickle kiddy-winkies. Oh dere-dere den...

Mind you, when I was 10 I knew it would be ever·so ever·so naughty to bash a little boy to death & throw his body on to a railway line for the train to mash up.

Didn't you?

But then, as MacNeice said of the Ancient World and I always think of my early days -

"It was all so unimaginably different
And all so long ago"

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 12:16 PM

Some aspects of the murder were not made public.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 12:25 PM

Police determined that James had been laid by the waist onto the rail, with his upper body on the inside of the tracks. It looked as if his head had been covered with bricks, but the force of the train disturbed the arrangement. The lower half of his body had been carried further down the track.

His clothing, which had been removed from the waist down, was laid near his head. His underwear was heavily soaked with blood. Nearby police found a heavy iron bar, two feet long, with bloodstains, and many bricks and stones with blood. They also found 3 AA batteries near the body. These batteries intrigued the investigators, who had suspicions about their placement before James was hit by the train. A tin of blue paint was also found nearby. James had been severely beaten around the head and neck. There had been fractures, cuts, bruises caused by blows from heavy blunt objects and there had been severe bleeding. On one cheek, a patterned bruise appeared, which indicated the imprint from a shoe. Although there was no conclusive evidence indicating a sexual assault, forensic specialists believed that some of the injuries below the waist were suspicious and sexual in nature.

Even the most experienced investigators were shocked and dismayed by the injuries to James. "You slip into professional mode, but you can never, ever forget," said Kirby, years later. It was bad enough that he had been abducted and murdered, but the beating was brutal, incomprehensible. Although it was common knowledge that a train had severed James's body (the kids who discovered him were already talking to reporters), the police decided to withhold the nature of the James's injuries from the public.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 12:59 PM

I feel desperately sorry for Denise Bulger....and for the train driver too. And of course, it goes without saying, for little Jamie. How can any mother close her eyes at night, in peace, again, after her child ended his life on earth in this way.

John Venables, I believe, is back in prison. Whatever happened to both these boys was no excuse for what they went on to do to an innocent little boy.

Whilst I understand how hard life is for so many unloved, abused children, it still does not excuse this type of thing happening, and the boys have to face responsibility for what they did.

Whether they can move on, I've no idea. Whether they should be allowed to...I've no idea.

Certainly though, little Jamie Bulger never got the opportunity to grow up as these boys have grown up.

If a dog had ripped James in two, it would have been put down, plain and simple.   

I think sometimes, brains are either born so disconnected and miswired, or become so due to shocking abuse, that there is very little hope of a 'normal' life ever being lived. We, as humans, struggle terribly when those brains belong to children, whereas we would be baying for blood, were they adult brains.

My emotions lie with Jamie's Mother and Father, for each and every day, they have to live with the images of what happened to their beautiful, innocent and happy child, simply because for a moment he let go of his mother's hand...and took the hands of two boys who had planned to do what they did to a little toddler.

There but for the grace of God go all Mothers and their Children.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 01:56 PM

I still can't imagine (and I suppose neither can anyone else) WHY they did it. What was going on in their minds? Was it insanity? Plain evil? Could any such acts be those of a sane mind? And if insane, can they be punished? Surely they can never be released if there's the tiniest chance they may do anything like this again. Ten years old is not so young as not to know right from wrong. These young men are and always will be terribly dangerous. Can they be 'cured'? I doubt it myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 02:05 PM

Eliza, I'm not saying this is the reason, but....children's minds these days are filled with fearsome images. Many are allowed to watch horrendous videos, and play horrendous video games WAY beyond their age.

I've no idea why people want to play, watch or make these things in the first place, but the images MUST be lodged somewhere in the minds of little children....desensitizing them in a most disturbing way sometimes.

Some minds aren't troubled by hideous images at all, but some are, deeply troubled.

Do children sometimes think that all will come 'back to life', just as in the video games, I wonder? Are they so used to "Kill! Kill" KILL!" that it becomes second-nature to some..?

Who knows...?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 02:16 PM

I heard that they'd watched 'Child's Play 3', a horror movie, and had re-enacted it. But at the age of ten, a normal child knows that torture and murder are wicked. I feel you're right Lizzie, that the film had somehow triggered something within them, and being seriously disturbed by abuse, they had become psychopathic, not seeing or feeling the agony of another. But we'll never really know I suppose. As you've said, James' mother must have suffered the torments of hell and still does, poor soul.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 03:14 PM

"Ah ~ diddums ~ children. Sweet ickle kiddy-winkies. Oh dere-dere den..."
Wonder why we have such funny laws that prevent children from being punished the same as adults?
Perhaps we should let Rupe the Murdoch make our laws for us, then we can all sleep soundly in our beds!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 23 Apr 11 - 04:47 PM

Call it what you want, find all the excuses that you like. It was rotten badness, nothing else , pure rotten badness and all the social workers and do gooders on the planet were never going to change these two bastards from hell.

Christ, how did we ever live without these wonderful people who manufacture reasons why people carry out such acts ?

Let's look into the reasons why they carried it out my arse. They carried out a premeditated sadistic murder of a child, yes a child that took their hand in innocence and walked to a place where he no doubt cried for his mother, cried in pain, cried in fear. They took turns at hitting him, injuring him, killing him and finally, planning his dissection and capitation.

Any of you that ignore all of these facts and have the cheek to look upon the perpetrators as victims are gullible and lacking in reality. May these two bastards roast in hell.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 03:36 AM

"Perhaps we should let Rupe the Murdoch make our laws for us"
Or Richie Black maybe?
A couple of days in Santiago Stadium would have sorted them out!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 04:50 AM

Jim, you have to be very, *very* careful here *not* to belittle what Denise Bulger and her ex-husband have to live with for the rest of their days. You also have to imagine the traumatic fear this little lad must have experienced before, hopefully, unconsciousness finally drew a curtain for him, prior to his death.

It is Jamie and his parents who are paramount here, no matter what else took place in the lives of others.

Nothing can, or should, ever negate their pain.

I understand exactly where Richie is coming from, to be honest...but I also understand that for any child to even think of such a crime, let alone carry it out, means that something, somewhere is broken beyond belief within that child or children.

Even so, the major victims in this terrible crime will always be, and must always remain, imo, Jamie Bulger and his family.

A few articles which speak of the boys back when it happened, and Jon Venables job as a bouncer, prior to him being re-arrested. Interestingly both set of parents blame the other child for leading *their* child into this terrible murder. BOTH children were left to watch harrowing videos, play harrowing computer games, with no supervision at all.

Telegraph article on Jon Venables

Jon Venables mother talking about her son

The drawing done by Venables, a few weeks before the murder

Profiles of the two boys





What worries me still, to this day, is that nothing has been learnt from this traumatic murder. Parents still allow their children to watch dreadful things, queueing up to buy them the latest violent game, often way beyond their age limit.

And even WITH the appropriate age limit mind-set, WHY do so many in our species, want to killkillkill?? WHY are these games made in the first place, and why do so many people become so addicted to them, particularly men?

Why did film makers, video game makers, not all come together to say "ENOUGH!" and change what they put out? Why did they not choose to start producing films/games of high adventure, but without gruesome plot lines, without endless killings, without hideous 'special effects'?   

What is it in, in the minds of some that almost wants violence on a never ending basis?

We have several generations who have now been raised on violence as 'entertainment'....and just look at the state of our world, the state of so many people and their children!

This unbelievable case was THE time for everyone to stand up and say how stupid they'd all been, how EVERYONE was guilty, in some way or other, either through making the videos/films, or buying them, or simply keeping silent about this problem.

On Dartmoor, where I used to live, I had to stop my daughter from going to a young girl's house, because her mother allowed this child to watch terrible videos. She was 10 years old. They were her brother's videos and she watched them whilst being left alone for most of the day, upstairs, whilst her parents ran the village pub. They were stressed, overworked and depressed, but they had no thought for Katie or her mind.   I asked her once, in complete innocence, prior to me knowing what was going on, what sort of films she liked, expecting her to say Disney, or musicals, or some such thing...She told me her favourite film was a Clint Eastwood one, where the flesh gets burnt of his arm. She loved to watch that clip over and over and over. I just stared at her, in horror.   

My kids were raised on Hollywood Musicals, 'Singing in the Rain' 'Seven Brides for Seven Brothers', Disney, or films with great stories, that left you feeling inspired afterwards, because I wanted them to experience the kind of films I was raised on too.

I cannot watch horror movies, never have been able to, because I see in pictures, so those images remain vivid in my head for years afterwards because every time someone mentions a word to do with a horror film, BAM!, out comes the image. Even Michael Jackson's 'Thriller' was awful for me, couldn't watch it, still can't.

I watched many war films when I was young because they were on TV a lot back then, not that long after WWII, 20 years or so, so that war was still fresh in the memory of all, but you were spared seeing the blood and guts. There wasn't a graphic 'zoom in' on someone's innards being outtards...but you still knew the suffering, the traumas of war, without feeling traumatised yourself. Now, so many films seem to glorify in the most graphic gruesomeness they can think of, seemingly wanting to outdo anyone else in the horror stakes.

I once saw Quentin Tarantino being interviewed. I kinda put him down as *severe* Aspergers immediately. Brilliant man, yup, but he ADORES violence, and the sicker the better...he finds it hilarious you see, absolutely hilarious and the more violence, the more violent that violence IS, the happier he is, the more he laughs. My blood ran cold when I watched him, because he has had such a profound effect on so many minds. Minds which ARE affected deeply by what they see. Minds which cannot switch off, or remove those images...ever.   

Many of those minds can only cope by de-sensitising, and they do that, often, by watching more and more and MORE violence of ever-increasing nastiness, until it no longer sickens them, because they no longer FEEL. They have switched off entirely...and so nothing, NOTHING means anything any longer, nothing shocks, nothing upsets...Just a numbness is there...

It is a HUGE problem, a devastating problem to society, to us as a species. It spills over into child-rearing, animal care, even love itself. Although love has been replaced by sex for so many, again, stripping away the emotion of the soul, replacing it with a physical need and little else.

I think I'm right in saying that a few years back David Puttnam stopped making films, because he was so distressed at the violence he saw coming out of Hollywood. The man who brought him back to film-making was George Clooney. I saw George giving him a Life-Time Achievement Award and David talking about his respect for Clooney's films etc...Apologies if I've got that wrong, it was many years back, but I'm sure it WAS David Puttnam.   

Short Bio

>>>"My belief is that no movie, nothing in life, leaves people neutral. You either leave them up or you leave them down." - David Puttnam

Producer David Puttnam valued artistry and the moral accountability of film characters over box-office returns. Born of a working-class family in England, he got his start as an advertising photographer in London during the 1960s. He then moved to movie production and made a few little-known films before he and director Alan Parker scored big with Bugsy Malone (1976). He and Parker then went on to make the Academy Award winning Midnight Express (1978). Amidst all the acclaim for that gripping true story of an American placed in a Turkish prison after drugs are found on him in customs, Puttnam publicly apologized for any exploitative affects the film had on audiences, thus earning him the reputation as a "responsible renegade." During his career, he had an eye for talented new directors and facilitated the debuts or breakthroughs of filmmakers such as Ridley Scott, Roland Joffe, and Bill Forsyth. He became chief of production for Columbia Pictures in 1986. There he promised to focus on cost-effective productions with an emphasis on artistry and also promised to bring in international filmmakers to diversify the type of films Columbia put out. Many of the films he produced there dealt with sensitive areas of society and politics. Puttnam avoided exploitation films and became aggressively dogmatic in his criticism of films such as Rambo because he felt the film's message morally irresponsible. He also showed little respect for the intelligence and moral fortitude of his audiences; eventually his ethical arrogance began to grate on those he worked with, and Puttnam was persuaded to leave Columbia -- with a $3 million golden parachute to soften the blow. His productions there were never released. Finally Puttnam went back to England where he continued to make films." ~ Sandra Brennan, Rovi<<<<

From 2000, Richard Attenborough talking about the same worries:

Richard Attenborough 'Violence Begets Violence'


We have ignored this at our own peril. There will be other Jamie's, other Robert's and Jon's...and the silence will continue to echo off the fridigly cold, de-sensitised walls of violence, where once echoed the warmth of far more humanity

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:15 AM

"Parents still allow their children to watch dreadful things, queueing up to buy them the latest violent game, often way beyond their age limit."

Lizzie did you read that piece on the picture? Did you notice the large naked breasts on the knife wielding monster in the drawing which was entitled "My Dad's House"? Did you notice the fact that Venebles had been subject to violence from his Mother - who going on his illustration of her, presumably liked to assault her son naked. I expect she got off on it, can you imagine your naked mother or father beating you to crap every day as a little girl? I wonder how old he was when that started, two maybe - maybe the age of Bulger, or younger? Who knows. But that's obviously what caused his brain to screw up. Serious physical, sexual and psychological abuse (not silly videos, though I don't think they are a positive influence) creates seriously disturbed children. Children who are abused that way, by their parents, learn that that is normal. Most of those who then go on to become abusers, do so at at older age, by which time they have matured and hopefully had other learning experiences. I don't believe Venebles knew right from wrong, he'd been repeatedly taught that wrong was right by his abusive mother, I don't believe that he was any more innately evil than you are. Nor was he innately any more good, you mention your loving father a lot, you were fortunate and learned those things you needed to learn from people who loved you. So did most of us. Venebles didn't and little Jamie Bulger got tragically caught up in a much bigger picture of ongoing abuse being perpetrated by people who should have been loving mummy and daddy, but who weren't.
Could Venebles ever be rehabilitated? Perhaps. People can go through very shocking things, and do so.

But I don't believe it was ever going to be a likelihood in our system.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:19 AM

The thread is about a child being murdered, his head pulverised by an iron bar, placed on a railway track and cut in half, and Carroll attempts to use it to score points against me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:36 AM

From that link, lively:

"...At first sight, it appears to be a child's attempt at illustrating a terrible nightmare.

But what makes this image so horrifying is that it was a violent fantasy, inspired by the 18-rated horror movie Halloween, and that the ten-year-old artist was close to committing a deadly act of his own in real life...."


These images remain, long after the TV has been turned off. They disturb a child's mind, possibly for years to come.

We are not addressing the problem whatsoever.

I recall going into a computer game shop when my lad was fairly young, asking if they had games for children, any new ones...ones without violence. The young man looked at me kinda weird...then he told me I was the first parent who'd ever asked him about a non-violent content. He told me that most parents just bought what the chidlren wanted, never asked a thing. It worried him too...

These videos aren't 'silly'. Most of them aren't even watched by parents...or weren't. Nowadays of course, many parents themselves are raising children on the videos they watched as children and guess what, those videos were violent too, because several generations have been raised on them.

People become 'detached' from reality....

I believe violent videos and computer games, damage as many children as actual violence in the home does...but we have turned away from even thinking about it.

Many children are abused, but they don't go on to do what these two lads did. I have someone close to me who had the most traumatic of childhoods, abuse was all around him. He grew up to be a nurse, evenutally, once all the drink and drugs had been dealt with. He knows it made a difference to him, LONGED to have a loving father, but his father abandoned he and his brother very early on. To this day he has no confidence and feels a gaping hole inside.   He would never have done what these two boys did though, neither would his brother.

So what is it in today's society that damages children even MORE than ever before, to the point where gangs of kids cut off a puppy's ears, as happened a few years back, to the point where children's cruelty towards animals, towards each other is so big that even the President of the USA has made a video about the problem..?   

Eyes wide Shut is the problem.   
Corporate Films and Games Profit is the problem.
Let the kids watch what they want, anything to keep them quiet! is the problem..
Lack of love is the problem
Dumbing down is the problem

Houston, we have a MAJOR problem!

Sadly, Ground Control has disconnected.......

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:42 AM

I'm with you on that one, Richie.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 06:29 AM

The thread is about a child being murdered...

It is not, Richie. That is a very important part obviously but it is about a documentary on TV the other night that I found difficult to watch as it opened up all sorts of questions that we had forgotten about.

I was sort of hoping it would help answer those questions I had but I realise that hope was folorn. The thread has already been spoiled by fools.

I will leave you too it.

MP.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 06:34 AM

Lizzie. Sadly there is a big demand for violent abusive films and video games. I can never understand why anyone would want to sit down and view such tripe. What is also disturbing, is the fact some parents watch their children sitting wide eyed and glued to a gaming controller cutting heads of the approaching enemy with machetes and shouting "yeah, got you". In a lot of cases, it keeps them occupied and not under their parents feet.

Have you noticed, no one is just evil these days, when someone murders a woman or a child, the bleeding heart brigade in our society conjurer up reasons such as "his drunken mother had sex with numerous men if front of him," or "his father sexually abused him" to give some reasonable understandable cause to the actions of some evil bastard as he smirks over a courtroom at the family of his victims.

Sadly cases of sadistic murder or torture of children are rising. I am sorry if I lack sympathy or compassion, but in my opinion, any man that attacks, rapes or beats a woman or child forfeits his place in society. PERMINENTLY.

As juveniles these two tormented, tortured old age pensioners in their homes. It went unpunished due to their age, they graduated to taking an innocent child and put him through an horrific ordeal then trail his blood soaked body to a railway track to watch it cut in half, that was calculated murder, they weren't cleansing their minds of past deeds they saw in the home, they wanted to murder a baby and they did it, most likely in the knowledge some goon of a social worker would be too willing to fight their corner if they were ever caught.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 06:35 AM

Well, I never thought I would ever say this, but I agree with Richies first post on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 06:37 AM

Lizzie;
With respect, and no reflection whatever on Jamie Bulger's parents - this is about a horrendous act carried out by two CHILDREN against another child, and how it should be dealt with - that is the issue here.
Unfair as it may seem to some, the judicial system in Britain is not geared to providing retribution for those affected by crimes, nor should it be - an eye-for-an-eye belongs in the dustbin that is The Old Testament.
An appaling act has been carried out by two chidren; I have no idea why they did what they did any more than you do, nor do I know what should happen to them - do you?
I do know that the 'rope-over-the nearest branch' solution is not one I'd want to contemplate (not put forward yet, but just lurking below the surface).
These threads always drag the usual stereotypes and caricatures out of the woodwork, from "it would never have happened in my day" Colonel Chinstraps, to the Matthew Hopkins school of law and justice - which one would you choose - if either?
And Keith's cut-'n-paste public displaying of the corpse in all his gory detail is yet another of his classics!
I don't know the whys and wherefores of this - do you think you do well enough to suggest a solution?
As little respect as I have for The Establishment I'm happy (and extremely grateful) to leave this one to the experts - it's what keeps that thin veneer between civilisation and barbarism in place, and long may it be there.
Richie Black is a knuckles-along-the-ground fascist with knuckles-along-the-ground solutions to the world's problems, and makes no effort to disguise the fact.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 07:30 AM

Silas, like myself you were probably raised by a generation that taught us right from wrong. I really can't tolerate this age of finding excuses for rotten badness. A member of my family worked in a psychiatric hospital as a nurse. Some time back, a 17 year old thug beat an 84 year old woman to a inch of her life in her own home and stole cherished items and money. As she recovered on a surgical ward with a stainless steel frame bolted to her lower jaw being fed by a tube, the thug who did it was admitted to the psychiatric unit for assessment after he threatened to kill himself. He admitted with laughter to other patients it was his solicitor that advised him to go to his GP as it would help his case. His hospital admission and tender young years were used in court to his advantage.

Society needs to focus on the victims and not finding excuses for bad evil bastards.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 08:17 AM

Don't get me wrong Richie, I agree with your first post, that is all. I detest the values you stand for and I find you an obnoxious and provocative poster.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 08:55 AM

No problem Silas, enjoy the Easter break.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 09:05 AM

Hard to notice that other than Richie Blackshirt's profound "evil bastards" and "hound 'em out of town" solutions, nobody has offered an argument, articulate or otherwise, as to why they did it and what should happen to them.
Nor has anybody from the "hang 'em and flog 'em" brigade responded to the fact that they were children and the law in Britain says they should be treated as such.
Change the law - just for this case, or for crimes committed by all those presently regarded as 'children'???
Come on people - don't be shy!
They were children, and unless someone has recently discovered an 'evil' gene, are creations of our adult society.
Some of this reminds me of the screaming rabble gathering around the prison van coming out of the court, whether a verdict has been arrived at or not.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 09:09 AM

As far as I'm concerned, if our society produces 'evil monsters' then we're all guilty.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 10:55 AM

These 'evil' children will grow up to be 'evil' adults. Permanent incarceration or capital punishment are the only two options.

Ye4s, before you ask, I AM serious.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 11:18 AM

I think it best to know exactly what you are pontificating about.
Jim does not like anything revealed if it does not fit his preconceptions.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 11:52 AM

He just breezes in Keith hoping to rub one member against another, he is best ignored. I would of thought a patriot of his calibre would have been giving the address at Arbour Hill today.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 12:00 PM

Both convict have received extensive therapy and rehabilitation during their incarceration.

Anybody here with a clear and factual insight into the success of the treatment?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 12:08 PM

Personally, I'm with Richie Black. Fry the fuckers. As if any of you will really lose a wink of sleep over it. Sanctimonious bastards--all of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 12:13 PM

Charming.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 12:51 PM

I'm not so sure that there's no such thing as an 'evil gene'. It could be rare and recessive, but an 'evil personality' can exist from birth IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 02:21 PM

"Ah ~ diddums ~ children. Sweet ickle kiddy-winkies. Oh dere-dere den..."

So MtheGM knows the differency wifferency between righty wighty and wrongy wongy. Of course he does. He was born into a nice middle class home with a great big silver spoon in his mouth, and probably a nanny to take him walkies round the park. If he'd played with those rough lads in those no hope tenements - you know the ones. No class, no style, no inside toilets, no bathrooms, and very likely a shared standpipe in the middle of the court as the only source of water - mumsie wumsie would have sent him straight to bed without any suppery wuppery.

No, MtheGM wasn't born on a sink estate populated by drug addicts and ne'er do wells. Nor was he born of parents who were too thick and hopeless to know how to bring him up and, if memory recalls, spent all their time watching violent porn.

I'm not sure which I find the most detestable, M the GM's opinions, or the sickening, patronising tissue of nonsense he chooses to wrap them up in. But then I always found the English middle class an odd lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 02:26 PM

These two men are now adults and should have their identity revealed.

The bottom line is that there are so many things wrong with the way two murderers have been treated in comparison to the way a victims family was treated.


Just for a moment think about, they murdered a two year old child. Remember that they poured Humbrol modelling paint into his left eye. The pathologist's report read out in court stated that Bulger's foreskin had been forcibly retracted and that batteries had been inserted into his anus while he was being tortured. The judge, Mr. Justice Morland, told Thompson and Venables that they had committed a crime of "unparalleled evil and barbarity... In my judgment, your conduct was both cunning and very wicked." A psychiatrist said unequivocally they knew the difference between right and wrong

So you want to know if the system cured these sick fucks ? Well on the 23rd of July 2010, Venables pleaded guilty to charges of downloading and distributing child pornography, and was given a sentence of two years' imprisonment. He had posed in online chat rooms as 35-year-old Dawn "Dawnie" Smith, a married woman from Liverpool who boasted about abusing her eight-year-old daughter, in the hope of obtaining further child pornography.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 02:53 PM

I think it was grossly irresponsible to let them out at all, although admittedly that is the only sure way to find out if such offenders have been 'rehabilitated'. In this case, the 'experts' (who will never be held accountable) were obviously wrong. They might as well draw names out of a hat - it would be cheaper and every bit as successful. My sympathies are entirely with the victim's family.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 03:14 PM

"before you ask, I AM serious"
Thank you for affixing this to your posting Silas; I do have a problem with the idea that any sane, humane adult can seriously suggest that the state could try and institutionally execute two ten-year-olds, no matter how heinous their crime - barbarity at its most barbarous, even worse than what they did - they at least had the excuse of being ten-year-old children.
The next timer you're in the company of a ten-year-old I suggest you take a look at him/her and repeat whet you have just written - if I belived in a god, I would ask him to forgive you!
As for the return to capital punishment; perhaps you'd like to write the letters of apology to the fmilies of the Brimingham Six, or the Guildford Four, or the Maguires, or all the others who served long stretches for capital crimes they did not commit - they'd all be dead as Norwegian Blues, left to you.
Sorry - all part of our barbaric past along with Drawing and quartering and bear-baiting.
"These 'evil' children will grow up to be 'evil' adults"
I suggest you look up the 10 year old murderess Mary Bell - Wiki does a pretty good job on her.
Richie - Little Richie;
My sincere thanks for brightening up what has been a rather uneventful day.
You have made a tired man very happy - or the other way round.
"He just breezes in Keith hoping to rub one member against another"
I will never again think of you without getting a warm glow in my... er, member - thank you from the bottom of my.... well... member.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 03:17 PM

PS Richie;
I'm very pleased for both you and Keith that you've managed to find a friend at last - I hope you'll be very happy - you seem very well-matched
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 04:11 PM

Thanks Jim, I would like to consider you as a friend, but you don't seem to agree with me.

Enjoy Domhnach Cásca there and don't be eating too many cúbóg

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 04:22 PM

Mary Bell, the Scandinavian case mentioned above, and all previous cases I have ever heard of pale into insignificance compared to the brutality and perversity shown by these two.
That is why I felt it important to fill in some of the details.
Ritchie has completed the picture.
I have no answers either, but false comparisons and other excuses to parade your ultra lib. prejudices are no help at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:14 PM

Suggest you might just have the wrong Mary Bell Keithie - look again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:20 PM

No, I was referring to her and the Scandinavian case.
Sorry it was not clear enough for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 05:51 PM

It is extraordinary Jim, that just days after withdrawing from another debate, you are involving yourself in this one.
Here you are defending the perpetrators and showing no compassion for the child victim and family.
Previously the victims were certainly hundreds and probably thousands of sexually exploited and gang raped children.
Not only did you show no compassion, but you ridiculed and mocked me for expressing mine.
Your only concern was to deny or conceal the common factor linking the perpetrators.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 24 Apr 11 - 11:38 PM

There was a guy named Calvert who some people ID'd as Venables even though he denied it. Yet he received death threats and there are still sluggards who think he is Venables. Since the press cannot reveal Venables' new ID, to connect him with Calvert would be a violation of that order ergo Calvert cannot be Venables.

They're ready to let an innocent man be killed than let Venables face his just punishment. His life is so much more important than Calvert's. They got off scot-free. After what they did, they walked away away laughing. I have no sympathy for then whatsoever. They should be killed.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 10:59 AM

"I think it was grossly irresponsible to let them out at all"
Nobody has yet had the courage to acknowledge the fact that these are two ten year old children we are talking about.
They were caught, sentenced and punished according to the law as it still stands at the present time.
The law says that children cannot be held fully responsible and punishable for their actions - that, to me is simple logic; whatever these children did, they did so as children and must be treated as such.
So far we have had execution, incarceration for life, lifelong persecution, burning in hell, genetically evil (straight out of gothic horror fiction)... 'any more for the Skylark?'
I'm assuming that those offering such 'humane' analyses believe that there should be no demarcation line and would be happy to see all ten-year-olds - including members of their own family, treated as adults in criminal cases?
The parallels between the Bulger and the Bell cases are remarkable.
At the age of 11 Mary Bell, along with a 13 year old girl companion, strangled two children and mutilated their bodies, sexually and physically.
It emerged during her trial that Bell had been repeatedly handed over to her prostitute mother's clients for sex from the age of four onwards, and on two occasions her mother had attempted to kill her; the court-appointed psychiatrist described her as a psychopath.
She was found guilty of manslaughter, sentenced and imprisoned for the full term of her sentence - in the same facility as Venables was later held - her companion was acquitted.
On release, Bell was hounded by the press, as was the daughter she was later to have.
She finally won the legal right to privacy, was given a new identity and, despite her childhood traumas, crimes, incarceration and later long-term treatment by the gutter press, went on to lead a normal life; three years ago she became a grandmother - she has been fully rehabilitated.
Would anybody else like to offer an alternative to rehabilitation other than the hanging, persecution and burning in hell we've had so far?

"……just days after withdrawing from another debate,"
Keith – it is none of your business what I do on this forum; do not distort my opinions and the outcome of other threads, they have nothing whatever to do with what is being discussed here.
May I remind you again that the last thread ended up with your being virtually isolated and unsupported and failing dismally to persuade anybody that all Pakistanis are cultural degenerates.
This is not our thread and I have no intention of making it so by dominating it with our vacuous arguments, as we have managed to do in the past.
In respect to the other contributors here, do not make this yet another long pointless dialogue between us as has happened in the past - state your case to everybody here and stop trying to pick a fight with me.
Any attempt on your part to make this a personal argument between us and nause it up for other contributors will be reported to a forum adjudicator – let's stop this now.
Over and out.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 11:22 AM

"They were caught, sentenced and punished according to the law"

"the Brimingham Six, or the Guildford Four, or the Maguires, or all the others who served long stretches for capital crimes they did not commit"

So what exactly is your view of British law then Jim ?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 11:25 AM

You could at least quote the whole sentence, Jim. My point was that it is always a gamble to let out the perpetrators of such crimes, and it puts the public at potential risk. If it wasn't irresponsible to let him out, how come he's back inside again?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 11:28 AM

"and failing dismally to persuade anybody that all Pakistanis are cultural degenerates."

Not surprising, as I never suggested such a ludicrous thing!

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 12:46 PM

"You could at least quote the whole sentence,"
Wasn't referring to you specifically Smokey - it seems a widespread opinion that they should never have been let out, nor Mary Bell for that matter.
Releasing a criminal who has been sentenced for a violent crime is always a risk, whether they had served their sentence in full or been released on appeal.
In this case they were released on licence on reaching 18, as the law demands.
Incarcerating them indefinitely is not only contrary to British law, but also would leave any government open to charges of contravening the statute of human rights.
As they were 10 year old children at the time of the crime it would also be inhuman in my opinion.
Still no reference to them being children I see.
I wonder if Silas could explain how an execution of a child should take place - would he be preaperd to carry it out himself or would he expect somebody else to do it on his behalf?
As a child of that age would be unlikely to break its neck when reaching the end of a drop, should it be left to strangle to death or would somebody have to pull the legs until it died.
Or maybe a weight could be added to its feet, with the risk of tearing the child's head off!!
Something to think about, doncha think??
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 01:39 PM

There are more ways of execution than hanging. There are humane ways of 'putting down' or 'destroying' dogs which attack children ~~ you read of such every day in the News In Brief columns.

These are merely general observations not directly related to this thread, but suggested by Jim's last post. As I have remarked on various threads many times before, I am profoundly ambivalent on the subject of capital punishment; can see, and appreciate, the arguments on both sides; believe that there should be more to the concept of punishment in general than mere deterrence, though that is clearly an important factor; and should certainly be opposed to its use in the case of any child... But in the present instance...

...as to what should have been done to Thompson & Venables: search me ~~ except they should never have been released when they were, and if we are involved in treaty obligations with the EU or whoever which necessitated such a procedure in our laws, then such treaties should be withdrawn from forthwith. The skies wouldn't fall.

~Michael~

Howdy McCormick, you silly little specimen: having a good throw-up, are we?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 01:43 PM

Jim, this thread is getting horrible. Please, can we refrain from the kind of thoughts at the end of your post. Isn't it enough that Denise Bulger has to live with horrific thoughts each and every single day of her life??????????


To be honest, I'm sick of hearing about these two men, as they now are.
Jon Venables is serving 2 years for downloading and distributing child pornography. The court was not allowed to take in his previous crimes when sentencing him for that...which, quite honestly, is absolute shite.

If I'd have been either of these boys, or Mary Bell, and had been allowed to grow up, then realise the enormity of the atrocious act I'd committed, regardless of what had happened to me, I'd have probably killed myself, drunk myself to death or taken an overdose...leaving a letter of the utmost sincere apology for the parents of the children I'd tortured, mutilated and then murdered.

In Mary Bell's case, I'd have asked for an abortion, because I'd have felt it not my right to have a child at all, let alone go on to live a happy family life, whilst the parents of those I'd killed lived each and every day of their lives in the utmost agony imaginable.

As far as Jon Venables goes, NO WAY would I have ever looked at, touched, viewed, or even listened to stories, of child pornography. His contempt for his crime, for children in particular, is pretty clear for all to see.

Responsibility is a strange word these days.

Whilst I can understand how damaged a child can become, and I know there are thousands of damaged kids out there, kicking up a stink, raising merry hell, very few of them would go on to do what these two did.

Personally, I think they should have stayed in jail for at least 20 years, then lived a very monitored life-style for many years after that.

I understand the Law is an Ass, so that ain't going to happen. And for his previous heinous crime not to have been taken into account beggars belief, but again, that is the madness of the legal system.

Our thoughts, our feelings of sympathy, should lie with Denise Bulger, her husband, and the parents of the children Mary Bell murdered too. They will have no grandchildren from those little souls. Their murders deprived them of more than their children, but of a future line of children going down through possibly, centuries.

Whilst those parents suffer each and every day in atrocious agony, and will do so for the rest of their days, the perpertrators of these horrific crimes have had a fortune spent on them, receive constant protection/anonymity and quite frankly, as in the case of Jon Venables, stick two fingers up to society.   He's promised to turn his life around when he gets out..yeah right...

Sadly...Denise Bulger will NEVER be able to turn her life around, no matter what happens to her, for their will always be a gaping hole inside her, always her arms will long to hold her Jamie, to see his smile again, to see him grown up with his own children on his knee...

I have great sympathy for damaged children, but I have no sympathy if there is no sense of sincere apology or heart-felt regrets of the deepest kind imaginable....and as far as I can see, there has been none from any of these now adult people.

I agree that Mary Bell's child and grandchild should be allowed to remain anonymous, because none of her life is their fault, but as to the rest of these folks, no..my sympathy is with the mothers and fathers, the families involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 01:50 PM

BTW, Jim ~~ you do realise that "would you do it yourself?", while emotionally satisfying, has no real argumentative merit? I bet I could think of a whole lot of procedures necessary for the maintenance of society which you would be reluctant to carry out yourself and can only be grateful that some people will.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 02:35 PM

Lizzie, you are correct in pulling the focus of this case towards this lady Denise Bulger. My heart goes out to her. I doubt any of the smiling "thug hugger" nutjobs knocked her door to convert her to the liberal forgiveness of cloud cuckoo land. I make no excuses for my desire to see these two bastards roasted in hell. I hate the law allowing them freedom, freedom that cost close to £3 million.

I'm the last person on the planet Michael would want hear a comment from, but that attack by "Citizen" McCormack was uncalled for and frankly reeked of jealously and class hatred. His background has nothing to do with his freedom to express an opinion.

Your flat cap and sandwiches are on the hall table Fred, close the door on your way out.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 03:27 PM

"There are more ways of execution than hanging."
There are indeed Mike - but thankfully not in the UK or Ireland any more (except if you happen to set fire to a naval dockyard - or has that gone too??)
The barbarism that was capital punishment is now only a fond memory of the would-be Madame LeFarges (like yourself, I take it) who yearn for the days..... ah well!!
I take it you have no great objection to killing children - along with our two 'abrading members'?
"Please, can we refrain from the kind of thoughts at the end of your post."
OK to see them off if you don't mention it in polite company in order not to scare the horses or upset the staff, eh Lizzie?
Did you know that when Ruth Ellis was hanged she had to wear canvas drawers because the insides of the woman who was hanged before her fell out when she was dropped - the realities of the 'good old days'!
"Sadly...Denise Bulger will NEVER be able to turn her life around,"
I doubt if any of the families involved will ever be able to turn their lives around - maybe we should see off the Taylor and Venables families while we're at it - wouldn't have to think about them then?
"I'm the last person on the planet Michael would want hear a comment from".
Apparently not the case Rich.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 03:35 PM

>>>>>>"Sadly...Denise Bulger will NEVER be able to turn her life around,"
I doubt if any of the families involved will ever be able to turn their lives around - maybe we should see off the Taylor and Venables families while we're at it - wouldn't have to think about them then?..."<<<<


They at least still have their sons. And of course, perhaps, had they loved them as Denise loved Jamie, ALL would still have their sons.

Again, my sympathy is with Denise, she is the mother without her son. Nothing will bring him back, nothing will take away the horror.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 03:46 PM

As capital punishment has been mooted a few times in this thread, I would like to say that I believe it to be barbaric, and I'm very glad it's no longer a punishment here in UK. I've just finished reading an extremely interesting biography of James Berry, Executioner in UK during the latter part of the 19th Century. He noted and described many hangings he performed, (and they were not all the quick, painless affairs one might imagine.) How any human being could snuff out the life of another in cold blood, as he did, is beyond my comprehension, no matter what their crime. Even if a method could be devised which was entirely painless, it's sinister and wrong IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 04:03 PM

Jim ~~ Please read my post 01.39PM in response to yours more carefully, & you will see I am no Defarges, but, I repeat, profoundly ambivalent on the matter of capital punishment: &, tho I would most certainly never wish to see a child punished in such a fashion, am much at a loss as to what would have been the right response in this most distressing instance.

Richie ~ I know we started off on wrong foot: but, bygones? & many thanks for your support in re the foolish & doctrinaire (& smartarse) McCormick.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 04:14 PM

On the previous thread it was I who had to keep reminding Jim that we were discussing children.
At least 3 died, and all were damaged.
It seems he only cares if they are offenders, not innocent victims.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 06:05 PM

I think that whoever is responsible for deciding whether, or when, such offenders are let back into society should somehow bear some responsibility for whatever happens as a consequence of their decision. They might be more careful about it then.

I believe Thompson and Venables should have been kept in secure care until they were 18 then sentenced as adults with a complete understanding of what they had done and the full consequences of their actions.

Mary Bell might well be a rehabilitated balanced human being for all I know, but no-one actually knows that for certain. I doubt if anyone here would be comfortable about employing her as a child minder.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 25 Apr 11 - 06:22 PM

Incarcerating them indefinitely is not only contrary to British law, but also would leave any government open to charges of contravening the statute of human rights.

They never let Brady and Hindley out. Should they have done?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:20 AM

"Jim ~~ Please read my post 01.39PM in response to yours more carefully, & you will see I am no Defarges, but, I repeat, profoundly ambivalent"
I'm aware of that Mike - I feel exactly the same way myself and I am as much at a loss as you, the deciding factor being that these were 10 year old children when this horrific act was committed. Perhaps I over-reacted in my response, but I find this hypocritical heart-on-sleeve handwringing by people whose primary interest or knowledge of these subjects doesn't extend beyond what they can scoop up from the net and put their name to.
We are talking about childrens' lives - three of them, not one, and the sheer horror of even considering taking two 10-year-old children and stringing them up - or even lethally injecting them, is probably as low as any 'civilised' society can sink.
"until they were 18 then sentenced as adults with a complete understanding of what they had done"
Can I get this straight Smokey - they should be punished as adults for what they did as children - should all juvenile crime be treated in this way - if not, why not?
Why differentiate at all between juvenile and adult crimes if they are going to be punished as adults anyway - let's cut to the chase.
Brady and Hindley were adults; whether they were fully responsible for their actions is, thankfully, not my business to decide. As here, I am happy to leave to those whose job it is. I am not prepared to see our justice system placed in the hands of the tabloid press, or with those who throw themselves at prison vans - or with ghouls who scream for blood on threads like this - are you?
"I would like to say that I believe it to be barbaric"
With you there Eliza; you should try to get hold of John Deane Potter's 'Fatal Gallows Tree - "an account of the British habit of hanging"' (if it is still in print). It has a wonderful description of The House of Lords' successful attempt to retain capital punishment in Britain in 1956 - they managed to delay it for a further eight years.
"From the hills of darkest Britain they came; the halt, the lame, the deaf, the obscure, the senile and the forgotten - the hereditary peers of England united in their detrmination to use their medieval powers to retain a medieval institution".
It seems their counterparts have bought themselves computers and joined chat forums.
Jim Carroll
PS Mike - thank you for not pointing out that I should have written DeFarge and not LaFarge.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:39 AM

Jim. The fact that they were 10 years old does not in any way diminish the crime. It was not a game that got out of hand, it was a premeditated abduction, torture and murder.

10 yeas old or 20 years old, its still the same crime and its still the same victim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:43 AM

"The fact that they were 10 years old does not in any way diminish the crime."

Jim posits a very good point, one that no-one has yet answered.
Should all Juvenile crime be treated in the same way as Adult crime, and the juvenile perpetrators treated the same as adults.
If not why not?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 04:08 AM

Jim, I don't know if you have children or not. Tell me this though, if your child had been Jamie, what would have been your reaction?

Would you have wanted nothing but kindness for these children?

Would you have felt 'a little bit cross' with them?

Or would you have keeled over in absolute grief that your child had been put through such absolute hell, prior to his horrific death and wanted those who had done it locked away for life?

I don't believe that minds which are not only capable of thinking such thoughts, but actually carrying them out, planning them beforehand, can ever be fully healed.

There are many disturbed children out there now, as I said earlier, because society has remained silent about the violence that is all around.

You talk of the disbelief of how society can want a Hangman, or how that person can carry out such a barbaric act....well, what is going on in society nowadays is also barbaric...because if you truly think that little children being fed a diet of unbelievable violence, of excrutiating vile images, in films, in computer 'games', let alone real life violence they are surrounded with, then you aren't even starting to raise your head above the parapet.

Children are FILMING other children being beaten up, by their mates. I mean WTF is that all about?????? Children now ENJOY violence! Their heads are filled with horrific images and thoughts...

My head was filled with Doris Day, Rock Hudson, Howard Keel, Gene Kelly, Deborah Kerr, Yul Bryner, the Carry On films...I wasn't raised on people being hacked to death, blood spurting out of every orifice, people being raped, murdered, cut into bits...!

There are some very, VERY sick people out there creating films, making 'games'...and children now sit for hours killing and killing and killing, often in the most terrible ways...

We have not progressed from the Horror of the Hangman, merely passed that outlook onto our children, as a species, for the Hangman felt that killing was right, he was unaffected by it, for the most part...that part of his soul cut off, desensitised, perhaps never having been there in the first place...so he was able to carry out his task then go home to bed and sleep. Same with those who torture...

And now, we bring our children up on all of this outlook...all of this killing, all of this hatred..and we wonder why we have the society we do.


I do not hear sympathy for you for Jamie's Mum and I find that deeply disturbing, to be honest.

If Venables or Thompson lived next door to me, I would be panic stricken to be honest, out of my mind, if I had little children.

I think that some crimes are so far removed from all that life is about that the only sentence is natural life, no matter what age the perpertrators are. Some minds are SO damaged they cannot be put back together again, and thus innocent members of society MUST be protected from them, at all costs.

I do not want to see children being hanged, but I really do feel that sometimes, life imprisonment should mean exactly that. I don't think Venables will ever 'turn his life around'...and I don't think he'll stop looking at child pornography either. I shudder at the thought of him being free again in a very short space of time, because I think his mind is severely broken..and whilst I feel sorry for that part of it all, my sympathy can only lie with the mother of little Jamie Bulger.

If these men were truly repentant for what they had done as children, truly understood what they had done, then I think they would have behaved very differently. Most certainly, one would NOT be behind bars, yet again.

And, I think that life inside prison, for Venables at least, would actually be far kinder, if kindess is what you want, Jim. There he is protected, he has a pattern, a routine to his days, to his life. He is surrounded by people who want to help him, who do not judge him and he would know, as society would also, that never again would he have the opportunity to commit another crime, ever again in his natural life. I think it would actually give him the security he may always have longed for, strange as that may appear to some.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 04:54 AM

"I wonder if Silas could explain how an execution of a child should take place - would he be preaperd to carry it out himself or would he expect somebody else to do it on his behalf?
As a child of that age would be unlikely to break its neck when reaching the end of a drop, should it be left to strangle to death or would somebody have to pull the legs until it died.
Or maybe a weight could be added to its feet, with the risk of tearing the child's head off!!
Something to think about, doncha think??
Jim Carroll"

I've just seen this post from Jim. There are no easy answers, but as far as 'doing it myself', well, probably not, we should employ specialists for this sort of work, no good having amatures bungling the job. It may seem a bit distasteful executing children even if they are evil murderers. The alternative is to lock them up forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:28 AM

Lizzie - are you for real or did Dame Barbara Cartland invent you?
"society has remained silent about the violence that is all around."
Society has also managed to remain silent about a great number of things not unconnected with these events.
I grew up on the Kirkby estate where the Bulgers live - I'll be there tomorrow afternoon visiting relatives.
I know what shit-holes they are, or certainly where when I was growing up, and I've seen what they can do to people - we have our own versions here in Ireland around Limerick City - or 'Stab City' as it's affectionately known.
You want to shriek "vengence" from two ten year olds - feel free to do so, but you have to ask yourself seriously - would your obvious mentor Mary Poppins approve?
"....what would have been your reaction"
Hardly a hypothesis to produce a rational reaction on my part, don't you think?
"The alternative is to lock them up forever."
And that's the only alternative we have as far as you're concerned Silas ?
"The fact that they were 10 years old does not in any way diminish the crime."
I think that you might find the law of the land might just disagree with you on that point - it may not diminish the effects of the crime but..... look it up..
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:38 AM

I knew right from wrong at 10 years old, Jim. So did you. So do most 10 years olds, regardless of where they come from.


"Lizzie - are you for real or did Dame Barbara Cartland invent you?"


I am for real. I know the agonising pain of someone saying to me 'You're baby is dead', so I know, just a fraction, how Denis Bulger must have felt, must feel every day of her life...

As I said, it worries me greatly that I have seen barely any sympathy for this poor woman, or her son, coming from you.

You have NO understanding, no real understanding of the shock, the grief, the trauma that she lives with each and every day.

Be thankful.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:40 AM

And...if MORE children were brought up on 'Mary Poppins' and not 'Chainsaw 2' or 'Halloween 4' or whatever, then this world just might, just might be a far, far better place.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: banjoman
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:43 AM

As a former resident of Norris Green Liverpool, I can vouch for the violence and total disregard for human life that is rife there. My mother , aged 75, was mugged by a gang of youths for the 50p she had in her purse. The only solution, in my view, is to ensure that life imprisonment for the perpertrators of such horrific crimes should mean exactly that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:46 AM

"And that's the only alternative we have as far as you're concerned Silas ?"

Yep.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 06:39 AM

Children aged ten and over can differentiate between bad behaviour and serious wrongdoing, that fact has been proven. They also know what pain feels like and Thompson and Venables knew just how much they were hurting poor little James.
The age of criminal responsibility in England is one the lowest in Europe.

There are millions of people that have been abused .mistreated molested etc etc that do not perpetrate the same on another human being. Sorry to rain on your parade of luvviedom but evil does not begat evil.


When Venables was 17, he has having full sex up to three times a week with a female guard whilst still in prison. The guard was never prosecuted. The government tried to cover up the innocent. So they even threw in a female guard prepared shag the little bastard for good measure. Again the government tried to cover up that the two bastards went on an unsupervised 'lads' trip' to Europe while on parole. Yes, let them check out the kids in Europe.


Currently law is no deterrent. Foe examplr, recently in West Croydon, a teenage girl who launched a racially motivated attack that saw a seven-month-old baby thrown into a bus lane avoid jail. The 15-year-old was instead sent on an anger management course. She was just convicted of causing actual bodily harm to the baby, not attempted murder. The baby's family have since returned home to Mauritius to escape the devastation the attack had caused on their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 10:01 AM

"I knew right from wrong at 10"
All this oozes a middle class smugness of people who have no idea of the conditions on these estates and the effects they have on the behaviour of those who live on them.
I'm sure Banjiman has, as his two neighbouring estates, Croxteth and Sparrow Hall both share Kirkby's problems, and have been prone to crimes of violence, some horrific, throughout my lifetime, though I totally reject his nonsensical non-solution of treating children as adults, fully recognised as nonsense by our law-makers in forming laws that clearly differentiate between the two.
I wonder how many here would be prepared to see their child banged up as an adult if he/she say, took a car without permission and ran somebody down in the process, without howling "but he/she is only a child" – yeah, right!!
These twwo were children when they committed their crimes, were recognised and punished as such – quite rightly; and demands that it should be otherwise, especially to the extent suggested, is every bit as inhuman as what they did – and as I said, none of you have the excuse of being 10-year-old children – at least, I don't think you have!!
I can assume that you all would be happy to see the reduction of any age differentiation in criminal cases – to what, I wonder – nine, eight, seven…. lower even???
"......and not 'Chainsaw 2' or 'Halloween 4"
So you do recognise that there might be reasons other than their being 'pure evil' to make them act the way they did - careful Lizzie, you might just end up a caring human being - if you're not careful!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 10:11 AM

Hmmm.
You may think they have been fairly, but I don't think the British Public have. They should be safley behind bars or quietly buried within the prison grounds. Life is hard enough as it is without having to pander to these evil bastards who will go on to commit further crimes and probably murder again. As a nation we are far too tolerant of this sort of thing - if we don't have the stomach for the death penalty, then life should mean life, and it should be a bloody hard life at that, solitary confinement and bloody hard labour till the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 11:16 AM

Why did the government attempt to cover up that a female guard was shagging one of the little bastards whilst he was serving his "so called" sentence, and why was no action taken against her ?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 11:43 AM

It strikess me that a good deal of information is being given in this thread that appears not to be officially supported, or at least no links are given. I don't read well between the lines.

My question is: If Venables's alias has not been made public, how is it that everyone knows the details of his arrest and the offense itself? For that matter, under what name has he been livng and how do the people who know him under that name feel about it?

And how has it been made public what occurred during his incarceration?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 12:08 PM

Ebbie, if you refer to anything I posted, please point it out to me and I will be glad to send you a link to the source.

Best wishes

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 12:56 PM

should all juvenile crime be treated in this way - if not, why not?

This case is hardly typical of juvenile crime, and I was discussing this case, not 'all juvenile crime'. They knew just what they were doing, and how wrong it was - that much is obvious. Their release and anonymity posed an undeniable danger to society, and was ill-advised. They are no longer ten year olds, they are adults who more or less got away with what they did without really answering for the consequences. It's not about vengeance, it's about protecting society from dangerous nutters.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 01:53 PM

"So you do recognise that there might be reasons other than their being 'pure evil' to make them act the way they did - careful Lizzie, you might just end up a caring human being - if you're not careful!"


Sorry??   I'm not with you at all, Jim. I've been banging on about this for many years. I *never* said anything about 'pure evil' either, by the way, just to set the record straight.

What I *did* say was way too many children are being fed a diet of extreme and graphic violence, in videos, computer games and even in music itself these days. Add to that the violence that carries on around them, all the put down TV programmes, the TV Soaps with their vile story lines, the wars around the globe, etc..and it's not a recipe for kind and caring children overall.

Once again, I see NO sympathy displayed by you to the victim of this terrible crime. The boys who carried it out had a CHOICE, you know, Jim....every killer does, every rapist does...They CHOSE to step across the boundaries of sanity and do what they did to a little toddler.

Jamie Bulger had NO choice whatsoever. None.

He did however, put his innocent trust in two boys who held out their hands to him, taking those hands, as most toddlers will do, probably encouraged by a smile...Those hands took Jamie's in the sure knowledge that they were going to do untold damage, unspeakable acts to that little boy.

There is ONE victim in this whole sordid affair. He is now dead and buried, his body in two separate parts.

He had NO choice, Jim.

Those boys planned what they did. They.....planned....it.


>>>>"I knew right from wrong at 10"
All this oozes a middle class smugness of people who have no idea of the conditions on these estates and the effects they have on the behaviour of those who live on them.<<<<<

That is such inverted snobbery that it beggars belief. How class-ridden to say that only middle-class families know right from wrong. What patronizing and insulting rubbish that is to every person on a council estate who has a bloody decent family!   So many families who have nothing still manage to raise their children to be decent human beings.

It's love that matters...and if you don't get that when you are little, then it matters not if your father is a King or a Dustman. Many Royal children had atrocious childhoods, despite living in castles and wearing jewels..A lack of love affects everyone, no matter who you are, or where you are from. However, most people, even those who lack love still know that what happened to Jamie Bulger was appallingly WRONG.

The only smugness I see on this thread is from someone who cares far more for those who did this to a little boy, rather than that little boy himself.

Jamie didn't know not to take the hands of strangers at that age. He didn't know that bad people exist out there. I'm sure that even those who saw those boys with Jamie would have ever dreamed what they were on their way to do.

As I said earlier, Jim...until you've heard the words 'I'm sorry, but your baby is dead', then you have no right to put seemingly all your sympathies with the perpertrators of this terrible and terrifying crime.   

They were FIVE times his age, Jim.

One of them has gone on to show the world that locking him up WAS the right thing to do and letting him out was so terribly wrong. Not much is known about Robert Thompson it would seem.

Perhaps you will only be silenced when Venables has possibly killed another child. He is still deeply interested in them, in a pornographic way, it would seem..so therefore, I would say that he is a HUGE risk to ANY child.

I'm sorry if he was born that way, or if he became that way, but his mind is now so sick and so sickening, that in my book he has lost the right to an ordinary life. He did that at the age of 10, when it became clear to most people with common sense, that his mind was already deeply disturbed. I feel some pity for him, and for the other boy, but they crossed that line of their own volition.

I feel the deepest compassion imaginable for Denise Bulger and her sweet, innocent son, Jamie.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:00 PM

Also, Venables, as with any other viewer of child pornography, is ensuring that even more children are being tortured, abused, raped, God alone knows what else, purely to feed a market of sick minded folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:04 PM

"You may think they have been fairly, but I don't think the British Public have"
Personally, as a (now ex) member ofthe British public, but still a citizen, I have never seen it in my interest to execute, or even incarcerate for a lifetime, children who have committed crimes in childhood.
The first is totally barbaric and places is no diffrent to their behaviour - they killed a toddler, so we'll kill two 10 year olds - is that right?.
"They knew just what they were doing, and how wrong it was"
That is an assumption nobody has the right to make unless they have access to informtion the rest of us don't.
"They are no longer ten year olds, they are adults who more or less got away with what they did.... "
I ask again - are you proposing that there is no bottom limit for the punishment of criminality?
You are now simply referring to simple revenge - we should be allowed our pound of flesh - no thanks; to primitive for me.
If they continue to commit crimes hopefullythey wil be punished, but one ting is certain, they will never again be out i=of sight of the authorities.
ANnd once again:
"I wonder how many here would be prepared to see their child banged up as an adult if he/she say, took a car without permission and ran somebody down in the process, without howling "but he/she is only a child""
"and why was no action taken against her ? "
Yeah - let's top her while we're at it.
"how is it that everyone knows the details of his arrest and the offense itsel"
Much of the information we have is based on speculation by the tabloid press -relaible or what??
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:05 PM

Well said throughout, Lizzie. I can't imagine what purpose Jim thinks he is serving by being so uncomprehending of your entirely valid points, and so patronising about them towards you personally.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:08 PM

My last was cross-posted with Jim's last: but I can't see that what he said there invalidates one jot what I said there.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Some mothers do have em
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:11 PM

I had a miscarriage as well, how does that make me any better qualified to take part in this argument? What a stupid thing to say. No miscarriage is anything like the pain that Denise Bulger went through. Her son was brutally murdered. However The children who murdered him were also victims. They were so brutalised by the underclass they grew up in that they were able to do something terrible and unspeakable. Losing a baby does not qualify anyone any more than anyone else to judge them, but growing up in the kind of households that they did on the estates that they did and experiencing the brutality and the abuse that they experienced might.

If you want someone to blame, blame our society that has allowed these awful places to exist, full of feral children and adults like Dickens's London. If you want someone to blame, blame every person who is not campaigning on the streets for social reform that would CLOSE the gap between rich and poor in this country. Instead of sitting here on messageboards talking about capital punishment for 10 year olds. Who are the barbarians here eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:14 PM

I ask again - are you proposing that there is no bottom limit for the punishment of criminality?
You are now simply referring to simple revenge - we should be allowed our pound of flesh - no thanks; to primitive for me.

I repeat:

I was discussing this case, not 'all juvenile crime'. It's not about vengeance, it's about protecting society from dangerous nutters.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 02:26 PM

"I had a miscarriage as well, how does that make me any better qualified to take part in this argument? What a stupid thing to say. No miscarriage is anything like the pain that Denise Bulger went through."

You are so far removed from what happened to me in what you say there that you would not even begin to understand, nor do I wish to discuss it further on here. - Thanks.

I live with council estates all around me, some of the kids are cheeky and a pain in the arse, some are decent kids, from decent families. It is no different from the estate where I grew up, a private estate, but again, there were pains in the backsides, problem kids..and decent kids too...Some of the problem kids had problems due to their families, some had problems due perhaps to physical, mental problems they were born with, who knows?

It is not just a gap between rich and poor, but a gap between those who assume it's only kids from council estates who are acting strangely which needs to be filled, for that is a Snob Gap of the highest sort.

Children from ALL backgrounds are struggling today, because of many of the things I've stated above, but to commit this kind of crime is extremely rare...and to say that 10 years old haven't a clue what's wrong or right when it comes to murdering someone, no, sorry, I do not accept that, unless there is something wrong, severely wrong, with the child in the first place, in which case they need constant attention and medical care probably for the remainder of their days.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:13 PM

If the media ban had been fully effective we wouldn't even have got to know about Venables' further offences and arrest. There's food for thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:19 PM

"What a stupid thing to say. No miscarriage is anything like the pain"
Patronising - moi?
I was referring to Lizzie'sd 'Mary POPINs type examples.
"I was discussing this case, not 'all juvenile crime'"
Can you do that - make one crime not applicable to an age limit and all the others applicable?
"it's about protecting society from dangerous nutters."
If someone is a dangerous nutter the last thing you do is bang him up with hardened criminals - he is hospitalised and attempts are made to cure him.
Presumably these children have been mentally assessed and declared sane enough to walk among us - if not, and they are a danger to the public then presumably they would have been sanctioned.
All this sounds very much like gross amateurs telling the professionals how to go about their business - pretty similar to putting our justice system in the hands ofthe Sun and The Daily Mail I'd say.
Put it another way - one of the childish pastimes over the last few years has been dropping stones from motorway bridges.
One group of little darlings dragged a log across the Clapham - Earlsfield railway line - potentially causing massive death and injury had a train struck it - hanging, drawing and quatering or what - and please include members of your own family before you venture an answer.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Some mothers
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:23 PM

You have said before on here that you have a miscarriage. If you do not want to discuss it stop bringing it up like it gives you some special right or privilege or insight that no one else has. You also do not know what happened to me, so do not presume that your pain or experience somehow Trumps mine. Thanks.

I have lost a child and still I can find compassion in my heart for those 2 abused boys, so maybe you should try to find some compassion in your own heart. To talk about all children "acting strangely" and "struggling" shows you to be so far removed from the lives and the experiences of those two boys as to be onanother planet. Maybe you should shut up and get rid of your pompous arrogance and think yourself lucky that you and your children have never had to experience the abuse that made those boys do such an evil thing. Because heaven knows what it may have done to you. So just thank god that you will never have to know what it feels like to be them.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:30 PM

I have no idea how one- or a society - should go about trying to cure such horendous capabilities. However, it is well documented that immature brains simply are not capable of processing consequences of even benign acts. The notion that a society should then execute a child who has committed such incomprensibly bad acts is a strange one, to say the least.

It is why a person of sub-normal capacity is not judged on the same basis as a normal adult.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:36 PM

'Guest' above: You wanna get personal, then PM me. Thanks.





Jim, you're missing the whole point of what I'm saying. Many children who've been raised on sick videos, sick games, have troubled minds. The images and ideas that many children today have in their heads from such an early age were never there in our minds.   Graphic, gratuitous violence did not exist. 'Snuff' videos did not exist...kids beating up other kids and filming it on their phones did not exist. Today, they do.

And yet you tell me that my belief these things are dreadfully wrong is me living in a Mary Poppins world? Do you mean you want those sorts of things to continue?   

I only know that if *any* mind is so broken that it can do what was done in this case, that mind, no matter who it belongs to, should be removed to a place where the rest of society is safe, where those who are good at trying to help can do the best they can...and where the mother or father of the victim concerned can feel that some sort of justice has come their way.

I still see no compassion from you for Jamie's mother, or for Jamie, and as such it's starting to deeply upset me. I therefore gladly retire from this gruesome, sadsome thread.....

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,An abuse 'survivor'
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:38 PM

"So just thank god that you will never have to know what it feels like to be them."

Here here!

I had extensive psychotherapy after my own childhood experiences. I was also very much loved by my family. Yet I still know there is much anger and violence in me lurking at a deep level as a consequence of those experiences and I imagine that it will always be a part of me.

I'm all grown up now and surrounded by loving people. Luckily for me I've learned about love and compassion as well as about sadistic cruelty. As such those darker feelings will never have a chance to be unleashed on anything or anyone smaller and weaker than I am.

Who would I have become if I had not learned about love as well as violence? I do not know and I doubt that I would want to either.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:39 PM

Can you do that - make one crime not applicable to an age limit and all the others applicable?

You can treat each crime on its own merits, but I say again, I was referring to this one, not the judicial system in general.

If someone is a dangerous nutter the last thing you do is bang him up with hardened criminals - he is hospitalised and attempts are made to cure him.

I agree.

Presumably these children have been mentally assessed and declared sane enough to walk among us - if not, and they are a danger to the public then presumably they would have been sanctioned.

It seems that process didn't work. We pay 'experts' handsomely to make these decisions, and in this case they were wrong. Normally their failures are not made public.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Some mothers
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 03:48 PM

Survivor, that is a very brave thing to talk about and it shows a lot of self awareness. Lizzie Cornish, I am not getting personal. You brought your own personal experience into this debate as if it gives you an insight that is better than others and as if it could only lead to one (right) conclusion. If you do not want your own self certainty challenged then do not bring up personal details that are completely off the topic anyway. Unless you had a child brutally murdered you cannot know how Denise Bulger feels.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lurcio
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 04:06 PM

So, Liz. Murderers and rapists always have a choice, eh? I have been lurking long enough to remember your arguments that it was the sluts dressed to incite that caused rapes. I guess by the same token poor little Jamie incited Venables and Thomson? Come on, make your views consistent if not sensible.

L.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 04:49 PM

"It seems that process didn't work. "
How hasn't it worked - it appears that, possibly through his incarceration, Venables has picked up some nasty habits, but as far as know he hasn't killed anybody else yet, nor does there seem to be much of a chance that he will do so - correct me if you have evidence to the contrary.
Lizzie;
I Apologise if I have either said anything to offend or got you wrong. I do have problems with your somewhat over-the-top turn of phrase sometimes.
"Many children who've been raised on sick videos, sick games,"
I could not agree more - but you appear to want it both ways.
If the videos and games have in any way affected a child's behaviour,then it is the adult world which has to take sole responsibility for that fact - it is the adult world that produced those videos and put them within reach of children for them to have that effect.
We have demands from most of the contributors here that these two children - monsters of our creation, according to you, and me, to some extent, be incacerated for life, and even put to death.
Don't we, as adults, and as the ones demanding such draconian punishment, deserve any punishment ourselves?
You ask if I have no compassion for Jamie Bulger's mother - of course I do, who wouldn't?
I ask you, do you have no compassion for Mrs Venables and Mrs Taylor, and even the 'monsters of our own creation' themselves - I don't see any here from you or anybody.
I would not support, condone, or in any way try to diminish what they did - it was horrifically and unbelievably monstrous - but come on - you can't have it both ways - they were not self made movies they watched, or violent video games of their own devising - they were part of the world we created, or at the very least, allowed to be created for our adult entertainment (that is its official title - adult entertainment).
If they are to be banged up for life, shouldn't we be in the cell next door?
                                        Nothing will alter the fact that these were ten year old children when they committed their crimes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:04 PM

They were 10.

But have I not read that they were already career criminals repeatedly playing the "I'm under age you can't touch me" card?

Children?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 05:15 PM

The loss of a child is pain beyond comprehension. That includes a miscarriage. I can only imagine the delight a woman must feel when she receives the news she is pregnant . She is a mother from that first day. She plans, she nest builds and she blooms. To me, losing that baby is the equivalent of a woman having her heart and soul ripped out emotionally . I speak as a father and a husband who was there helplessly watching on more than one occasion .

But I wasn't the one carrying that life, I wasn't that had to live in that body that failed me. For anyone to demean anyone brave enough to open up and talk about is about as low as you can get. No Lizzie, don't ask them to pm you to talk about, I would prefer the bastards to pm me. Here when you are and by Christ am I ready.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 26 Apr 11 - 08:01 PM

How hasn't it worked - it appears that, possibly through his incarceration, Venables has picked up some nasty habits, but as far as know he hasn't killed anybody else yet, nor does there seem to be much of a chance that he will do so - correct me if you have evidence to the contrary.

Does he seem rehabilitated to you? Would you trust him with your children? He's re-offended and they've locked him up again - isn't that enough evidence for the failure of his rehabilitation? They got it wrong. He was released as an eighteen year old, not ten, and he has proved that they misjudged him to be fit for release. If the decision to release him was right, he wouldn't be back inside. I only hope they were luckier with Thompson, though I don't suppose we'll ever know for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 03:42 AM

"But have I not read that they were already career criminals"
Richard; we know virtually nothing about them other than what has been invented and passed onto us by the popular press - and yes - ten years of age makes them children whatever we would wish them to be so they can be dispose of as 'one of our failures' - if we are to accept Lizzie's argument
"Does he seem rehabilitated to you?"
I've no more idea than you have - sticking a child in prison with other criminals has never seemed a logical way of rehabilitating them.
Are you proposing that they dispose of one and see what happens with the other - rather like a lab experiment?
Maybe we should just hand them over to Richie - I'm sure he'd find a bucket big enough to drown them both in.
"He was released as an eighteen year old, not ten,"
                                     Nothing will alter the fact that these were ten year old children when they committed their crimes
It seem that people find it easier here to come up with flip answers by pretending they were adults when they committed their crimes and by avoiding the implications of treating them (and therefore all children) as fully responsible adult criminals.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 04:10 AM

You are being a bit disingenuous, Jim, I feel. I agree with you, as I have said, that 10-year-olds, however iniquitous, shouldn't be treated just like adult criminals; but Richard's point about their having spent a good while earlier taunting the authorities for not being able to touch them whatever they did because they were under the age of crim respons is well authenticated, and to come on with this 'only innocent kids' bit really won't do {as I suggested in an earlier, perhaps over-sarcastic, response, to which Fred took peculiar exception}. I am surprised, btw, that their savvy let them down when it came to killing Jamie ~ if it had occurred to them to do it a few months earlier then probably nothing could have been done about it at all. Just ask yourself, I beg you, would you have felt better about that?

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 07:16 AM

'only innocent kids'
Sorry Mike - aren't you being a little disingenuous yourself - I've certainly never suggested that they were innocent of anything; they killed a toddler in a most horrendous manner.
Whether they 'taunted the authorities' or not is a moot point - nothing to do with this trial is fully authenticated as far as I'm concerned; the secrecy surrounding it because of their age and the lynch-mob hysteria whipped up by the press in order to sell newspapers has made it near impossible for anybody to claim that.
"if it had occurred to them to do it a few months earlier".....
Well - that's children for you!!
My point has been all along that the law rightly treats crimes by children as crimes by children - that for me is a mark of civilised responsibility - and long may it continue to be the case. If anything, the savage responses here, ranging from 'lock 'em up for life', to 'string 'em up' only serve to underline the necessity to continue to do so if we are not going to slide back into the 'an eye for an eye' mindset.
I'm off to Kirkby to see how it fared after Thatcher's assault on the North of England - wasn't very good before she got her claws into it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 07:23 AM

Say "hello" to the Molly pub for me, Jim, I have some very funny memories of that place, the Molyneux.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 08:24 AM

"the Molyneux....."
When we moved to Kirkby (I was 14), because the estate had been built on land that had previously been owned by a church which had made conditions of sale, the only pub there was The Cherry Tree on the East Lancashire Road, outside the estate.
This remained the case until a few years before I moved - no pubs, no cimema, no swimming baths, no dance halls or social centres, no other facilities - no wonder we're all misfits.
There's a story of a car driving through the streets which broke down.
The driver got out and opened the bonnet, and two men came out of a block of flats carrying a car-jack, raised the car off he ground and began to unscrew the nuts on the wheels.
When the driver protested he was told "If you're having the engine, we're having the wheels!"
Good days!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 09:17 AM

On this subject I am unsure. As a mother my gut reaction would be to wring their necks and hang them high if I am honest. But at the same time I would hope that the physciatrists, care workers and professionals keep monitoring and studying their behaviour throughout Thompson's and Venables's incarceration if only to prevent and help pick up on warning signs with other potentially dangerous kids.

Perhaps violently explicit games and films do contribute to some people with those who are immature and slightly already unhinged. Mary Bell wouldn't have had access to any influences like that so that couldn't have contributed to her case, which makes that all the more disturbing in a way. The only thing I can come up with is that in both cases it was an extreme evil form of bullying that went way too far and crossed over the line, which has to have a punishment for the loss of a child's life, the CTV cameras showed them leading James away showing it to be premeditated, no normal 10 year old would dream of taking a toddler away from it's mother.

If James hadn't been taken would they have attempted to have taken someone elses or did they ever try it before or discuss doing it? They must have spoken about it between each other at some point. Would they have grown up and become Brady type killers if they hadn't been seen or caught. If they could make use of their time imprisoned to get to the root of it, it might prevent more potential horrors as long as they inform us the public what they have found rather than hushing it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 09:48 AM

Rehabilitation does NOT work with child killers. Its an expensive waste of time even trying.
I don't, frankly, give a shit how old they were, they were old enough to know what they were doing and that is the point.
I hope Jim et al will be able to sleep at night when one of these bastards kills another innocent child.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 10:31 AM

"Does he seem rehabilitated to you?"

I've no more idea than you have - sticking a child in prison with other criminals has never seemed a logical way of rehabilitating them.

He re-offended, therefore he was not rehabilitated - wherever he was.

Are you proposing that they dispose of one and see what happens with the other - rather like a lab experiment?

No, they are your words, not mine. I'm not aware of having proposed anything of that nature.

Nothing will alter the fact that these were ten year old children when they committed their crimes

They aren't now, and yet Venables is apparently still a danger to children. No-one has pretended they were adults. They were ten, and now they're not - they are the same people though, and Venables has demonstrated beyond doubt that his freedom was a bad idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 04:59 PM

"Mary Bell wouldn't have had access to any influences like [horror video games and films] so that couldn't have contributed to her case, which makes that all the more disturbing in a way."

No it wasn't either films or games that contributed to her case, it was the far more serious abuse she endured at the hands of her prostitute mother's clients. I do wish we could stop talking about video games here as though video games and films are THE magic formula which creates child killers.

While scary films and games may further disturb already disturbed children It's a quite nonsensical notion to claim that horror films create child killers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 05:43 PM

I don't know, Guest Lively, I recently sat through only five minutes of the film "Saw" and had to leave, it was appallingly horrifying. But some quite young teenagers were sitting happily munching their popcorn, totally unmoved by the scenes of unspeakable gutsmut on the screen. I wonder if this 'blunting' of normal, natural responses to agony, blood and terror etc. is capable of making an abused or violent child into a psychopath, (by which I mean unconcerned with the suffering of others) If a young child views these things, could they not give him/her ideas and scenarios to play out? Would you be happy for your child to have access to such stuff?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 27 Apr 11 - 05:48 PM

It's a quite nonsensical notion to claim that horror films create child killers.

I agree, but I still don't think children should be exposed to that sort of stuff. I'm all for protecting their innocence. You can't put it back, after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 02:03 AM

"If a young child views these things, could they not give him/her ideas and scenarios to play out?"

Scenarios to play out? Well, yes children mimic, it's natural to them in their play (killing games based on films are played in every playground in the land - cowboys and indians anyone?).

But abused children already have enough scenarios to reproduce: those they have already been through in real life. One example of a little boy in infant's school, who took a little girl into the toilet and told her to kneel. He put his penis into her mouth and urinated into it. That was a scenario he had lived out in real life. Except of course it was an adult man's erect penis that had been forced into his mouth and which had ejaculated into it. A teacher intervened in that instance. But what if he'd been a few years older, that naive - nay innocent - mimicing of what he'd been subjected to, in the only way he understood, might have been played out far more nastily.
I don't think he was evil for premeditatedly reproducing something he'd experienced, not at five, not at ten.

"Would you be happy for your child to have access to such stuff?"

No, I wouldn't. I don't think they are a good thing for anyone, and especially not for kids. It's possible that they do 'contribute' like an extra pinch of salt to the bubbling pot.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 02:33 AM

My apologies by the way, for sounding snappish.

I've found the emphasis on video games frustrating when there are far more extreme and serious things going on in the lives of so, so many children. Things that some adults may possibly find it impossible to imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 03:12 AM

With respect, lively, I think you need to watch some of these films/games because some of them are shocking. Many children aren't bothered by them, many are. Venables drawing of a scene from 'Halloween' was deeply disturbing.

Why do you think advertisers pay a small fortune to use the visual media network to display their wares? Because they *know* these images sink deep into the minds of their prospective customers.

Violent images are no different.

If you surround children with violence, be it secret violence in the home from abusive parents or relatives, or be it commercial Corporate Bastard sickening violence, the results will be similar. Those results are de-sensitisation of the child's mind.

It's why children are now so mean to each other, so bullying towards each other, why they film other chldren being horrifically beaten up, then send it to their mates, or put it on Youtube.

Of coure, if some 'expert' researched all of this, then came up with information showing how it was affecting different parts of the brain, turning out the lights in the Sensitised Room and turning ON the lights in the De-Sensitised Room, then many folks would believe it, because THEN they'd have 'scientific evidence' to relate to.

What they can't see is the ACTUAL evidence right in front of their faces, and that the children who don't care, who don't feel, who don't understand that it's wrong to film others being beaten up...

You ask the RSPCA about the upsurge in violence towards animals these days too. They are deeply worried about it..

I'm not saying it's the ONLY contributory factor, but it's one, of many.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 03:51 AM

"I don't, frankly, give a shit how old they are"
And thereby hangs the problem here - you damn well would if it were your own children, and quite rightly, or are you happy to tell us that you would be prepared to see one of your own go to the drop without protest?
"Child murderers are not rehabilitated"
Can you give us a precedent for claiming this? They aren't exactly ten-a-penny - Mary Bell was rehabilitated; should she have gone to the drop? I can't think of one who went on murdering - can you?
I would lose as much sleep at the idea that we had moved back to the barbaric practice of ritual state killing - gone forever - and the idea of killing ten-year olds fills me with disgust. Predicting who are likely to be the criminals of the future is the stuff Tom Cruise films are made of.
They were ten when they killed and were punished as children, rightly if we are going to remain a civilised country.
Any crime they commit now will be treated as adults - equally rightly.
All this has the disturbing ring of cutting the hands of thieves and stoning unfaithful wives - effective maybe, but......!!!
I agree with Lively - children have many things thrust on them by the adult world which they should not have to cope with - to abandon them, and to punish them for succumbing to them is not only washing our hands of the responsibilty of our own shortcomings, it is cowardly and inhuman.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 04:28 AM

Inhuman is what happened to Jamie, Jim. I still see no sympathy from you for that little boy or his family.

Talk to me of Jamie. Talk to me of the agony of his family. Talk to me of their *life-sentence*.

Talk to me of the little children in the pornographic images that the adult Venables downloaded and shared around.

Talk to me about the mothers and families of Mary Bell's victims. Talk to me of her child and grandchild who will always have to live with the knowledge of what their mother/grandmother did...that going on down the line, for generations to come.

And with due respect, we know nothing of Mary Bell's life, other than she had a child who also went on to have a child. We can only assume she's been rehabilitated.


There should be two sides to your sympathy Jim. TWO sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 05:26 AM

Is it just possible that ever so often there is going to be a potential Brady, Hindley, West, Bell, Thompson and Venables in life as horrific as it is? Society should be protected from them but more research should go into finding out if any of the people have a trait or gene in common with each other that can be spotted at an earlier age. If a story emerges about an adult child abuser such as a priest or someone fanous we throw our arms up in anger, rightly so. The difference is the line of taking a life hasn't been crossed disgusted as we all are about it. There must be something that happens pre-adolescence 9-13 depending on physical maturity that triggers off those kinds of thoughts and I am inclined to think that it is more to do with the particular person.

Mindless animal cruelty is another indication again, it has to be something within that particular person.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 05:36 AM

···Whether they 'taunted the authorities' or not is a moot point - nothing to do with this trial is fully authenticated as far as I'm concerned; the secrecy surrounding it because of their age and the lynch-mob hysteria whipped up by the press in order to sell newspapers has made it near impossible for anybody to claim that.···

Bit of special pleading in this point, I think Jim; esp in the bit I have emphasised. The police, who had no particular reason that I can see to fudge this particular issue, stated that the pair had been well-known to them for some years as exploiters of the 'age of crim respons' get-out. Do you really have to have witnesed any offence committed with your own eyes to believe it has taken place?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 11:57 AM

"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

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 12:31 PM

As far as I can see, no-one here has actually suggested executing 10 year olds. The question of setting an age limit on criminal responsibility is a tough one, but I think the safety of the public should be a higher priority in this case.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 12:36 PM

"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."

I have never called them 'monsters'...but what they did was inhuman.
Those families still have their sons. It is a very different thing.
They also didn't care much for their boys when they were smaller, pretty much left them to bring themselves up, in very dysfunctional families. Some kids who come from tough backgrounds go on to cause trouble, desperate to get some kind of attention...but this crime was sadistic. It was so far removed from breaking windows, stealing, being a bloody nuisance etc...

"How dare you suggest I have no sympathy for the families of all concerned?"

Good to hear that you obviously have. Sometimes, folks can become too focussed on those who committed the crime, rather than those who were the victim, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 01:33 PM

"As far as I can see, no-one here has actually suggested executing 10 year old"
"Personally, I'm with Richie Black. Fry the fuckers. As if any of you will really lose a wink of sleep over it. Sanctimonious bastards--all of you."
"Sadly cases of sadistic murder or torture of children are rising. I am sorry if I lack sympathy or compassion, but in my opinion, any man that attacks, rapes or beats a woman or child forfeits his place in society. PERMINENTLY."
"I have no sympathy for then whatsoever. They should be killed. "
"Permanent incarceration or capital punishment are the only two options."
Pay attention Smokey
"They also didn't care much for their boys when they were smaller, pretty much left them to bring themselves up, in very dysfunctional families"
We don't know that Lizzie, but if you are right, then the perpetrators become victims themselves.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 02:09 PM

Yes, I was wondering when these evil little bastards would become victims.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 03:46 PM

It seems to me that the absolute doli incapax rule is wrong, wrong, wrong.

I don't really have any doubt that the two little bastards knew that what they were doing was wrong - but revelled in that as they had previously revelled in being able to flout any rules on the ground of their age. This is based on "similar fact" anecdotes - my late wife was a social worker.

If their wrongdoing did result from inability to tell right from wrong, then their place is in Broadmoor until it can be shown with reasonable certainty that they do know right from wrong and will choose not to do wrong.

If they did know right from wrong then they should be imprisoned for the protection of the public - until it can be shown with reasonable certainty that they will choose not to do wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 04:04 PM

I was paying attention Jim. Two of your quotes are josepp's, and an obvious wind-up which should have been ignored, as everyone else did. The other two were not suggestions to execute ten year olds.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 07:44 PM

Silas has called for capital punishment and confirmed it, I took Josepp seriously and in line with other calls here (as did Peter Laban), Richie Blackshirt has clearly called for capital punishment - as I said, pay attention.
"I don't really have any doubt that the two little bastards knew that what they were doing was wrong "
Then you have information the rest of us haven't, and the authorities have knowingly and maliciously released two psychopaths into the world to kill again - do I have that right?
I understood Broadmoor was a hospital for the criminal insane and did not cater for ten-year-olds - do I have that wrong?
Though locking a ten-year-old up with a bunch of murderous nutters is bound to make a man of him and teach him right from wrong?!!!!!
"Yes, I was wondering when these evil little bastards would become victims."
I didn't say that - Lizzie did.
"Those families still have their sons. It is a very different thing."
And still not a hint of recognition that everybody connected with this horrific case has suffered in one way or another - I thought it was me who is the heartless bastard?
"Sometimes, folks can become too focussed on those who committed the crime, rather than those who were the victim, that's all."
The cry of every vigilante itching to take the law into their own hands.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 08:00 PM

Ah as always Jim Carroll gets everything ass about face.

I see you are now supporting this new group in Northern Ireland that claimed the Omagh attack. You should be ashamed of yourself man.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: RobbieWilson
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 08:33 PM

I have only just picked up this thread and I have to say how much I admire Jim for sticking to the point in the face of such vitriol. The fact still remains these horrific crimes were carried out by 10 year old children.

Saying that is not to take away from the horror of the events, or to minimise the pain of Jamie's parents but to ask the question " How have we managed to bring up two little boys so badly and what are we going to do about it?"

Several people have made the point that these two were already well down the road to their criminality by the time they carried out this outrage, so they were even younger than ten when their fate was sealed?

I am sure that like all children they knew right from wrong, what they did not have was a normal sense of proportion, of the scale of the wrong, of the importance of human life, of the difference between this and all of the other things that they did wrong. These are things which normally develop as children grow to be adults.

We should be looking to put every effort into making sure such a crime
never happens again. The quick and easy answer of labelling these two as aberrant, evil monsters just born evil saves us the effort of trying to avoid raising two more like them.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 08:33 PM

We seem to have different interpretations of what has been said, Jim, and I think rather than bore people silly arguing pointlessly over nothing, we should show a little respect for the victims here, and agree to differ.

My original point was that (in my opinion) it was irresponsible to let Thompson and Venables out when they did. If you think it was the right thing to do, it's your prerogative, but forgive me for not sharing your enthusiasm.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 28 Apr 11 - 09:52 PM

For clarification, just in case I've got this wrong, does anyone here actually think that UK law should allow for the execution of ten year olds?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 04:53 AM

In the end, it boils down to whether you believe people can be born evil or whether circumstances, influences, upbringing, education, etc, make them/us what they/we are. I firmly believe the latter, and so does the state - the murderous gene is an invention of science fantasy and will remain so until proved otherwise. It is what separates civilisation from savagery (and Texas).
Most civilised societies recognise that fact and set a limit at which an individual can be made fully answerable for their actions.
Venables and Thomson were only two thirds through their 'childhood' period when they did what they did and had five years to go before they reached full accountability.
As horrific as these events were, you cannot pick-'n-mix; it goes for all people and all crimes or it goes for none - if the latter, this pair will not only have killed a child, but they will have contributed to retuning our society to a state of savagery.
"I see you are now supporting this new group in Northern Ireland that claimed the Omagh attack"
I don't for one minute expect a reply to this, but whenever did I do this?
I think they are murderous thugs, and I always have done - show me were I have ever said otherwise.
You really are the pits - and dim with it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 04:57 AM

"Yes, I was wondering when these evil little bastards would become victims."
I didn't say that - Lizzie did.>>>>


Nope, it wasn't me that said that, it was 'Silas'.

Please get the originators of your qoutes correct, Jim, else it causes confusion and put words into the wrong mouths giving misleading ideas about people.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 05:00 AM

Yet again Jim Carroll makes a statement and then tries to distance himself from it with a belated u turn. That one is played out Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,wampum
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 05:08 AM

Is that the clarification which Jim Carroll requested?

Poor show Mr Black.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 05:19 AM

"does anyone here actually think that UK law should allow for the execution of ten year olds?"
Silas
"Permanent incarceration or capital punishment are the only two options."
Josepp
Personally, I'm with Richie Black. Fry the fuckers. As if any of you will really lose a wink of sleep over it. Sanctimonious bastards--all of you."
Josepp again
"I have no sympathy for then whatsoever. They should be killed. "
Silas again
"we should employ specialists for this sort of work, no good having amatures bungling the job."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 05:31 AM

"Nope, it wasn't me that said that, it was 'Silas'
Sorry Lizzie - crossed wires here - you raised the point of horror films and video games playing a part in making Venables and Thomson what they were - I agreed with you (with qualifications) - it was this I was referring to, and is part of the reason for my holding the opinions that I do.
If I was the cause of the confusion, I apologise.
"Is that the clarification which Jim Carroll requested"
Didn't need clarification Wampum; I was already quite clear on the fact that Richie is a lying moron.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 06:07 AM

Well Jim, I think Teribus and Keith finished you off publicly a long time back. They put your bizarre theories and lack of credible response to questions into the spotlight for many of us. Maybe you are better off just banging the drum with Des Dalton and the boys !

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 07:58 AM

Whatever Rich, but still no substitute for evidence for your lying claims, innit!!
Back to the discussion in hand if you've no great objection, old man!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 08:42 AM

It occurs to me that the reason children are not punished as severely as others is that they know no better. This two did. They'd been playing the system for years.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 09:53 AM

Jim, I wasn't actually asking you that question, and your quotes aren't referring to ten year olds; they are in the present tense. If anyone actually supports the execution of ten year olds under UK law, I'm sure they can speak up for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 03:16 PM

Nope! twernt me that said they were victims.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 04:19 PM

It was Jim ~~ here's the quote in b&w. Why is anyone arguing?

"We don't know that Lizzie, but if you are right, then the perpetrators become victims themselves.
Jim Carroll" --

-- followed by, from Silas, "Yes, I was wondering when these evil little bastards would become victims". [yesterday 2.09 pm].

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lurcio
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 04:25 PM

Anyone called Mark Stevens on here?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 29 Apr 11 - 05:48 PM

The documentary about which this thread was started seemed to be implying that they were some sort of victims, though I didn't catch much of it. I got the impression it was a bit of a damage limitation exercise though. I imagine a lot of people disapproved of their release, and in Venables' case were proved right. However, whatever 'made' them like they were, the end result was the same, and public safety should be the first priority, regardless of how old they were at the time. What I'd like to know is, if they had to let them out, why they weren't watching them a damn sight more closely than was obviously the case. Whoever was responsible for those decisions owes the public an explanation.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:37 AM

"It occurs to me that the reason children are not punished as severely as others is that they know no better"
The reason they are not punished severely is that it is regarded that up to a certain age they are not deemed as being fully responsible for their actions - to develop a situation where the authorities can decide that one individual is responsible and another is not would lead to the blackest of black farces - come on Richard - you can do better than that.
We don't send young people to school at a set age, or allow them to freely view certain films, or buy cigarettes, or drink alchohol.... or whatever age restriction we put on their activities, on the basis of their individual capabilities, we - rightly - set a limit for ALL children; otherwise any restriction would be unworkable.
"If anyone actually supports the execution of ten year olds under UK law"
I gave examples of people who had actually declared their support for the execution of ten year olds - this question arose by your claiming it had not happened. Maybe your question should have been' does aybody else....?"
"It was Jim "
I qualified my comment Mike - I have in no way said I agree with what Lizzie said, and I'm not sure I do, but if she is right then they have been made what they are by adult activities - porn, video games and horrifically violent films that present violence as a virtue and an entertainment.
Coincidentally, I glimpsed about ten minutes of one of the films that was said to have been one of their influences - Child's-play (Chucky) 2 - pretty revolting stuff and still freely available on openly accessible television channels for the 'entertainment' of our children.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:57 AM

Well, no, Jim, for many many years the qualified doli incapax rule applied permitting acquittal of those between 10 and 14 if they did not know that what they were doing was wrong. We did indeed apply criminal sanctions on the basis of individual understanding, and, it seems to me, rightly so. This charming pair demonstrated over and over again that they knew that they were doing wrong and that they could escape retribution because they were under 10. They were, as I said before, career criminals.

So, first, from the point of view of punishment, they deserved punishment as much as any other criminal.

Secondly, from the point of view of protection of society they should have been kept away from the public until it could confidently be shown that they were not a menace to society.

The third purpose of a prison/restraint regime is rehabilitation, and that evidently failed.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:03 AM

··· "It was Jim "
I qualified my comment Mike····

I know you did, Jim. There was no critical or contentious intent or any such in my statement here; just that posters had been arguing about who first intro'd the concept of 'victim', so I was trying to settle the matter in quoting your post simply as a matter of fact.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:15 AM

It's a brain thing, Eliza. Some are born with no lights at all in the Sympathy, Empathy and Caring department.

Hitler surrounded himself with such brains, of course. Whether he was born that way, or became that way after both his parents committed suicide, who knows.

Either way, I think it's very hard to turn those lights back on again, particularly if there are no electrical connections there in the first place in which to place 'new bulbs'...

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 11:17 AM

"Some are born with no lights at all in the Sympathy, Empathy and Caring department."
Lizzie, you appear to be re-inventing human anatomy to create a new born-a- monster' species; sorry - such creatures are formed by personal circumstances and not born - Ray Bradbury fantasized them brilliantly in a couple of his short stories.
"they should have been kept away from the public until it could confidently be shown that they were not a menace to society."
And presumably it was judged that they were - I don't believe that the crimes committed by Venables, which he almost certainly picked up while incarcerated, counts as failure. If he were to continue with violent criminal activity, that would be a different matter and would be presumably acted on by he authorities. Thankfully Britain doesn't operate a three-strikes-and-you're-out, as does America.
Nothing that has been put forwards here persuades me in any way that this, or any other case should be taken out of the hands of those responsible and put in the hands of what is essentially a vigilante (even lynch) mob.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 11:26 AM

Well Jim, the 'nature/nuture' thing.
Do you really belive that deliquency of any form is due to nuture? Do you not accept that some people are just not nice?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 11:48 AM

What a pity that they were not struck by lightning. (Anyone remembe the Bad Seed?)

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 01:47 PM

I gave examples of people who had actually declared their support for the execution of ten year olds

Yes Jim, twice, but we don't agree on them. End of story.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 02:44 PM

"Do you not accept that some people are just not nice?"
Can honestly say I've never met a three/six/nine-month-old 'narsty bastard'.
Children are a blank page - you and me 'write the story' - get it wrong - take the consequences.
"Anyone remember the Bad Seed'
Yeah, and Damien, and The Omen, and The Exorcist; and read Bradbury's The Small Assassin, and The Veldt, and James's Turn of The Screw - great entertainment, but they're all fairy stories.
Does anybody seriously believe in 'original sin' and inherent evil?
That is what is being proposed here.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:27 PM

Can honestly say I've never met a three/six/nine-month-old 'narsty bastard'.

Ah, that's because you were fooled by their evil manipulation techniques. They are survival machines with no conscience at that age, and as soon as they have teeth, they will bite you and laugh at your screams.

Or is that just mine?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:36 PM

Oh, dear, Smokey- I fear for you. :)


No. I do NOT believe that a child is born 'evil', whatever that is at that age. To believe that tripe would be to go back two hundred and more years. How many here - I'm referring to perhaps three Mudcatters - would have been happy with the goings on in Salem, Massachusetts? Hold fast to your beliefs regarding these children and you would likely have found yourself on the committee that condemned those 'witches' to death - and rejoiced at it.

Hey. I think I have just convinced myself of the truth of reincarnation.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:43 PM

Ebbie, I'm not complaining, and that's only one way of looking at it. :-)

So far though, their ruthless training has working perfectly & I am a devoted slave.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 03:58 PM

No Jim, not by me it's not, so please don't put words in my mouth. However, it's not all nurture as you well know. Brothers with identical upbringings can turn out very different.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 04:29 PM

It's nonsensical to say it's all down to nurture. If you blame the parents, their shortcomings must be down to nurture too, and so the grandparents', great grandparents', ad infinitum. Leading to the notion that no-one is to blame for anything. In effect, it's not much different to a genetic trait.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:33 PM

Saying it's all down to nurture' does not lead to the notion that no-one is to blame for anything. While there is a genetic component to one's personality, there comes apoint in one's life when responsibility has to be accepted for one's 'sins' even if they were inadvertent - Sophocles put it very well in 'Oedipus Rex' where Oedipus, although he had no way of knowing that he was committing patricide and incest, accepted the responsibilty for his actions and resultant punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:38 PM

"Brothers with identical upbringings can turn out very different."
Upbringing, while a major formative influence, is not the only one on our lives.
"No Jim, not by me it's not,"
Then what - if not built-in evil?
There has been no effort here on anybody's part to move from blaming two legal and actual ten-year-old children for what they became to commit the crimes they committed - and a refusal to accept any suggestion that others might have played a part in their making.
"Leading to the notion that no-one is to blame for anything."
We are still talking about ten-year-old children.
Nobody has suggested an alternative to setting a limit of responsibility for criminal acts, nor has had the courage to discuss the implication for other children, including their own for criminal behavior.
If adults here refuse to face responsibility head on - is it fair to expect two ten-year-olds to face up to their acts?
I'm not putting words in your mouth Silas, but it would be interesting if you did.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:44 PM

The notion, DMK, not the fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 05:46 PM

I believe that once someone becomes a sociopath, they don't change. If there are experts here, I'd be happy to hear your views. I could be wrong, and I hope I am. It might well be that a 10 year old can be a sociopath who doesn't identify with other people and is incapable of empathizing. Even those people can learn not to do things that will get them in trouble. These kids never learned that, and I think they remained a danger to society.

I don't think the death penalty is acceptable for children, but they should be kept somewhere where they never have access to potential victims.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 06:07 PM

Dear Jim Carroll,

I NEVER said I condone the execution of 10-year-olds. I simply said these two should be put to death--they're not 10 anymore, are they?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 06:11 PM

I appreciate that, Josepp, thank you. Mind you, I still think you're being a bit harsh..

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 06:17 PM

////I believe that once someone becomes a sociopath, they don't change.////

You're right. If you're born without a conscience or have it squashed out of you via severe childhood abuse, you can't acquire one later on. You either have one or you don't.

Most sociopaths are not dangerous and will never hurt anyone--they simply have no feelings of love or affection for anyone other than themselves. They're a pain in the ass but little else.

What criminal sociopaths do is learn to mimic real people as they get older. For example, a couple loses their son who was fighting overseas. The sociopath will see others offering their condolences to the bereaved couple. As he gets older, the socipath realizes that he must do the same so that his deficiency is not apparent.

If a coworker is hurt in a car wreck, the sociopath will express great concern for this person's well being not because he is concerned--he has no cpacity for it--but because he knows that this is what is expected of him as an adult. It's purely a survival mechanism--a way of not being caught, of not standing out in a bad way. One of the best examples I can give is Dennis Rader, the BTK killer.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 06:25 PM

I reckon we're all born without a conscience, but maybe some are born without the capacity to develop one.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 06:44 PM

Actually Josepp, ignore my last post, it was irrelevant hairsplitting now I think about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 08:20 PM

They are not 10 years old anymore so they can now be put to death? Is that convoluted thinking or what?

I noticed earlier that you said that they should be "sentenced" now; you never mentioned the possibility of a new trial. So you are saying that if one does something horrific at age 10 (or age 6? Or age whatever?) and survives to age 20 (or age 18?) that person should now be killed?

I wonder how you would go about it: On his or her 20th birthday, perhaps? Maybe at midnight there could be footsteps outside one's cell...

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 08:34 PM

'Twas I who said "I believe Thompson and Venables should have been kept in secure care until they were 18 then sentenced as adults with a complete understanding of what they had done and the full consequences of their actions." That allows for the possibility of being sentenced only for manslaughter or taking into account the time they already spent incarcerated, depending on the seriousness of the case. I wasn't suggesting the inflexibility of capital punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 10:47 PM

////I noticed earlier that you said that they should be "sentenced" now; you never mentioned the possibility of a new trial. So you are saying that if one does something horrific at age 10 (or age 6? Or age whatever?) and survives to age 20 (or age 18?) that person should now be killed?/////

If a person commits a vicious murder at age 10 or 8 or whatever, they need to be locked away until their 18th birthday and then executed on that day--no appeals.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 10:53 PM

Lovely.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Apr 11 - 11:46 PM

josepp ~~ are you seriously suggesting that someone should live knowingly under sentence of death for 8 years? Just think of the implications of that.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 01 May 11 - 12:01 AM

It doesn't take much working out who hasn't had children around here..

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 01 May 11 - 12:07 AM

////josepp ~~ are you seriously suggesting that someone should live knowingly under sentence of death for 8 years? Just think of the implications of that./////

(shrug)

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 01 May 11 - 01:57 AM

Any Daily Mail readers present? Just a thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 01 May 11 - 05:55 AM

OK Jim, this is how I see it.
I think we are being slightly side-tracked about whether kids are 'born bad' or not. To me it does not really matter. Personally, I think some people are intrinsically 'less good' than others – make of that what you will.
The point is, surely, that for whatever reason, these pair decided to abduct torture and murder horrifically a toddler. It appears that they were well known to the local police who seem to be powerless to do anything about their activities. I am not even slightly interested in how old they were, they clearly knew what they were doing was by any standards wrong, and if they had not been caught, it is likely that they would have gone on to commit further crimes. Now, we do not as a nation have the stomach for the death penalty, and it may well be that it would not be appropriate in this case anyway, but these murderers a should be locked up for life, and I mean life. They are already 'bad', exposing them to criminals inside the penal institutions could hardly make them worse. One of them has been convicted of downloading child pornography. Few people here seem to be aware of the implications of this crime (which should also carry a mandatory life sentence as far as I am concerned), and the victims of this type of pornography, it is evil bastards like Venables who perpetuate this trade and are as bad as the producers of these horrific films and photographs.
So what do we do in this country to help the situation?
We give them false identities at enormous cost, allow them the freedom to re-enter society under a government approved alias, and they are free to associate with whoever they wish, one of them could be marrying your daughter for all you know.
I would like to see them banged up in a secure institution forever, or at least until another inmate does the job for us and snuffs them out.
Hope this is now clear.

---

If you wish to discuss the subject, please do.
If you wish to attack another person posting here, it will be deleted.
If personal attacks are all this thread comes to be about, it will be closed. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 11 - 10:43 AM

"I simply said these two should be put to death--they're not 10 anymore, are they?"
A sort of death row for children until they are old enough to be executed - oooooo; what a good idea!!!!
More later, when I've had time to digest that one!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 01 May 11 - 10:44 AM

I think we remain devided over this sad case. Let's hope it never happens again.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 11 - 11:41 AM

What is clear is we have a bunch of vigilantes with a lynch mob mentality rarin' to 'get' (execute or bang away for life) two children who the law prohibits from treating as adults.
None of you are prepared to bite the bullet and say (or even address) that you would be prepared to abandon the legal limitation as applied to all children - including your own.
Some of you have concocted pseudo- psychological theories to suggest that we are born the way we remain in order to justify this leap backwards.
Two of you make no pretence of wishing two young people executed for crimes committed when they were children - though one of you has added the rider "or at least until another inmate does the job for us and snuffs them out."
I think this will be one of the few times in my life that I find myself totally in agreement with Richie Black.
"I think we remain devided over this sad case"
What a depressing world.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 01 May 11 - 11:52 AM

Agreed.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 01 May 11 - 12:00 PM

////A sort of death row for children until they are old enough to be executed - oooooo; what a good idea!!!!////

So what's wrong with that? Listen, folks, instead of just repeating what I say with 10 question marks or exclamation marks after it try actually spelling out in English words exactly what is wrong with the suggestion.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 01 May 11 - 12:08 PM

/////What is clear is we have a bunch of vigilantes with a lynch mob mentality rarin' to 'get' (execute or bang away for life) two children who the law prohibits from treating as adults.
None of you are prepared to bite the bullet and say (or even address) that you would be prepared to abandon the legal limitation as applied to all children - including your own.
Some of you have concocted pseudo- psychological theories to suggest that we are born the way we remain in order to justify this leap backwards.
Two of you make no pretence of wishing two young people executed for crimes committed when they were children - though one of you has added the rider "or at least until another inmate does the job for us and snuffs them out."/////

Here's where liberalism and I part company--the insane idea that everybody deserves a second chance. No everybody doesn't deserve a second chance--that's just common sense. SOME deserve a second chance. Others clearly DO NOT. And Venables and Thompson fall into the latter category, I'm afraid. Christ, we kill stray pets if nobody wants them because we can't afford to keep caring for them in shelters but these two shit globs have some kind of societal value and have to kept alive and protected at all costs?? Could someone explain this because Jim Carroll obviously can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 01 May 11 - 01:28 PM

So we take two children, with impaired understanding of life, so educationally limited, and make them live almost as long as their lives to the date of their admittedly horric crime, knowiung they will be executed at the age of 18.

This may make sense in a country where people can be kept waiting on Death Row for years, and then be executed when evidence exists that they were innocent because of due court process having been followed and it cannot be overruled.

This may equally make sense to someone with a similar lack of empathy to the actors in this case. Those eight years at that age are a very long time.

That rehabilitation failed is more an indictment of the way they were dealt with in prison. We don't know that enough was done, or tried to be done. If that story about the warder is true, then adequate car4e was not taken. How did Venables become able to download child pornography? These are people who have been failed first by their parents, and then by society. Venables should certainly be kept out of the way of doing harm.

Maybe some people do not deserve a second chance, but the choice of whether it is offered should not be in the hands of people with a shortage of empathy themselves. Empathy, BTW, is not a synonym for sympathy, but an understanding of others' minds. It can, itself, be found in nasty people, who use their understanding to hurt.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 May 11 - 01:48 PM

What's wrong with waiting until a certain age to kill a convicted child? For starters: It is a child. Secondly, a wing or cell block full of children waiting to get old enough to die boggles the mind. On the other hand, it could be a real money maker; one could sell lots of chances to tour the facility and view the condemned. Maybe a spitting room could be provided in order to enhance the experience.

Oh, yeah. You have convinced me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 01 May 11 - 01:51 PM

"Maybe some people do not deserve a second chance, but the choice of whether it is offered should not be in the hands of people with a shortage of empathy themselves. Empathy, BTW, is not a synonym for sympathy, but an understanding of others' minds. It can, itself, be found in nasty people, who use their understanding to hurt."

Hear hear - Well said, Penny.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 01 May 11 - 02:27 PM

Comparing a stray animal to a child is beyond me.
Killing a killer is nothing but revenge, not justice.
No one ever has the right to take the life of another human being UNLESS it is done in self defense, and the threat to ones life is Imminent.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 11 - 02:59 PM

"No everybody doesn't deserve a second chance"
This isn't a second chance Josepp - they were children, and the mark of any civilised society is that it doesn't kill ten-year-old kids, or even punish them as adults.
If you are unable to understand what is legally or morally wrong with placing two ten-year-olds on a death row for six years then executing them, then I very much doubt if there is anything anybody here could possibly put forward to change your mind.
In the evil stakes, your suggestion out-evils anything done by Venables and Taylor by a mile
Thank you for making my case so eloquently (I do believe it to be the logical conclusion of much that has been argued here).
Penny S says it all for me, and far more eloquently than I could.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 01 May 11 - 05:16 PM

Ghoulish is the word that comes to my mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:46 AM

You seem to have this fixation about their age which, frankly, I simply can't understand. If you want to talk about children, then children do not commit these sorts of crimes.
Kendall, its not revenge, its an efficient way of ensuring that they can never reepeat their crime and allow some other poor toddler and his fgamiliy to suffer again.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:56 AM

Sadly JIm, this thread seems to be making very strage allies. I find myself more and more in agreement with Liz in the fact that you seem to have no thoughts at all for the real victims of this case, the Bulger familiy. I make no apologies for the fact that I would like to see these bastards wiped off the face of the earth. you can protest as much as you want with your holier than thou attitudes, but to use one of your anologies, if it was your child that had been the victim ofthese shits, you may well be thinking differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:27 AM

An interesting discussion is going on on BBC Radio 4, "Start the Week" on the nature of "evil" in people, and the relation to empathy.

Start the Week

This is the programme site, and you need to find the link to today's programme on the right.

The discussion includes Simon Baron-Cohen, who studies empathy, and someone who works with inmates at Broadmoor, with others.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:31 AM

"Sadly JIm, this thread seems to be making very strage allies"
If it is allies you want Silas - then you land firmly in Josepp's camp with your:
"I would like to see these bastards wiped off the face of the earth."
I see no condemnation from you for his horrific suggestion that they be held on a newly created childrens' death row for six years and then topped - an establishment equivilent of what they did to a toddler - only much longer drawn out.
You select the 'victims' to whom you give your sympathy very carefully - as do others here. As far as I am concerned, everyone connected with this case is a victim; Jamie Bulger and his family, the Venables and Taylor families, even the two ten-year-olds who carried out the horrific acts, they all have my sympathy to one degree or another.
But it isn't sympathy under discussion here, it is what should be done when children commit serious crimes.
Your solution is to treat them completely as adults - mine is that, as the laws of our society make this impossible, they must be reformed, returned into society and monitored in some way or other until it can be ascertained as certainly as it is possible to do so, that they won't repeat their crimes.
To me, it is you who is taking an inhuman and irrational stance - eye-for-an-eye is as primitive and as vicious as it gets.
You haven't said how you would facilitate your revenge - do we repeal the laws that make it impossible to punish children; do we ignore those laws when it suits us; should there be any age limit whatever (I think Josepp drops it to 8 - can't really bring myself to re-read his postings).
Phrases like holier-than-thou, do-gooder really don't cut too much ice with me; they are meaningless convinience phrases designed to avoid thinking arguments through.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:50 AM

Many here like myself with grandchildren or great grandchildren as in my case, find it hard to think about that poor child and what he suffered.

This wasn't a one off act of mindless vandalism by these two bastards, they had long since graduated from vandalism, bullying and petty crime. This was murder, not of a children the same age as themselves or older, it was a baby of 24 months. Tortured, beaten, sexually abused and murdered.

Neither of these two should ever have been released. Do you want to hear it again Jim, I would toast the fuckers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:02 AM

Well, Jim, we must ALL be victims then.
No, the real victim in this case was Jamie Bulger and his family.
'I' didn't select him or anyone else to be a victim, it was those evil bastard murderers who did that. They have no right to take part in our society and if there is no alternative, they should be locked up forever. Trouble is, this is a huge waste of money and resourses.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:23 AM

There's a difference between never releasing, and killing. (It is interesting how those in favour of killing often avoid that word and use words like "roast", "toast" or "fry". Not "execute", "electrocute", "guillotine", but words which obscure the meaning.)

Yes, some have used the words "killed", "put to death", and "execute" in this thread, but those other words, too. And there is something very odd which I have only just noticed about that selection. Nasty.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:26 AM

This 'huge waste of money & resources' is unfortunately, Silas, a price that must be paid for maintaining a reasonable level of civilisation. As I have said, I do not oppose all capital punishment {I don't think so, anyhow} as resolutely as Jim; but if we are to have it at all it must only be applied with the utmost care and circumspection in exceptional cases; and certainly never in the case of 10-yr-olds, whatever their iniquities or previous 'form'. I find josepp's suggestion quite untenable, much as he may respond 'shrug' to my objections.

It follows, then, that I consider that these two little horrors should have been confined for whatever may remain of their lives in disagreeable, tho humane, institutions; subjected, say, to lifelong unvarying conditions such as those my National Service generation will recall of their army basic training time. The expense of this is, I repeat, a price that a society worth living in must pay.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:44 AM

"Trouble is, this is a huge waste of money and resourses."
So we kill them because it's cheaper?
And not even an attemepted approach to the practicalities or implications of such an act.
Where does this differ om dragging them out of the prison van and stoning them to death?
"Well, Jim, we must ALL be victims then."
Or culprits, maybe.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:57 AM

Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 02 May 11 - 06:45 AM

There are other ways of resolving problems. Shipman and Spencer are two names that come to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 09:23 AM

"Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things."
Then we have nothing to say to each other.
I think your stance is barbaric; you think mine is holier-than-thou.
I support the the legal line taken by civilised societies, you have Richie Black and Josepp on your side.
Good luck!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 09:30 AM

Hey Jim, I don't have 'a side', these are my views and mine alone. If the persons you mention happen to agree with me I can do little about that, though it is distateful to have any views with Richie/Mark in common. Fortunatly for all concerned, this is just a discussion group and it matters not a jot what we say here because it will make no difference to the way things are.

So, I'll wallow in my barbarity and you can wallow in your piety and perhaps we can be friends on other topics?

Cheers

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:38 AM

////What's wrong with waiting until a certain age to kill a convicted child? For starters: It is a child.////

Erm...no, it isn't. He was a child when he committed the crime, He's an adult when he's executed. Now try again:

Why shouldn't we do this?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:40 AM

////Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things.////

Finally, somebody besides me on this thread with some damn sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:55 AM

Will killing them bring back the victims? Will locking them up for life bring back the victims?
An eye for an eye only perpetuates the barbarity. Apparently, some of us haven't been down out of the trees very long.

I say, lock them up for life with no possibility of parole.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:56 AM

/////This isn't a second chance Josepp - they were children, and the mark of any civilised society is that it doesn't kill ten-year-old kids, or even punish them as adults.////

I know you feel that way. What I'm trying to get out of you is a credible reason. WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults???

Tell me this: Do you believe that the "punishment" they received was adequate?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:10 AM

"WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults"
Because they were children when they committed the crime maybe!!!
"and perhaps we can be friends on other topics"
I certainly hope so Silas.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:15 AM

////Will killing them bring back the victims? Will locking them up for life bring back the victims?/////

And that's your idea of justice???

/////An eye for an eye only perpetuates the barbarity.////

Realy? Ii would think that slapping perpetrators on the wrist because of their age might have had something to do with that.


////Apparently, some of us haven't been down out of the trees very long.////

Well somebody else said the language on this thread is too veiled so please tell us exactly what you meant by that.

///I say, lock them up for life with no possibility of parole.////

But that won't bring back victim--you just said so!!

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 12:20 PM

Me:"WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults"

Jim Carroll: Because they were children when they committed the crime maybe!!!

Ok. Now give me a REASON why that makes it wrong. You've repeated endlessly that they were children when they committed this deed. I think we all agree on that much.

What I'm asking is, WHY shouldn't they be executed now that they are adults? You seem to be treating their crime like they were caught shoplifting or something.

And stop giving me this garbage that they were abused. I don't care. Lots of people were abused as children and didn't go off and wantonly torture and murder a much younger defenseless child. That's not a youthful indiscretion--that's sign of extremely dangerous criminal behavior that has never proven n one single instance to have been reformable.

So again: WHY shouldn't they be executed as adults for a horrible crime they committed as chidren who were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:12 PM

"WHY shouldn't they be executed now that they are adults?"
Becauseat the time the crime was committed they were children.
The law says they were not responsible for their actions and common sense tells us that ten-year-olds cannot be held responsible.
This was not a borderline case - they had six years to go before they could be judges responsible for their actions - that is the law of any civiliesed country - children can not be treated as adult criminals - and certainly not put to death.
"chidren who were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong?"
You say the y were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong - the law says otherwise.
Do you think all child criminals should be treated as adults or should the idea that children should be treated as children be abandoned - if so, at what age, you mentioned 8?
I don't know where you come from, but that is how it works in Brirtain, the U.S. Europe - certainly throughout the West - tell us how it works in your part of the world.
It is the law - do you believe that your personal opinion should over-ride the law.
                                              Civilised countries do not kill or jail children; what part of that do you not understand?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:14 PM

PS And they certainly do not judge them retrospectively as adults for crimes committed as children
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 02:38 PM

I think my meaning about evolution was quite clear.
So, you think locking a child up for life is a slap on the wrist?

Does it really make sense to be against killing and still be in favor of killing a killer? If it is not ok to kill, it is not ok to kill.
"Beware the man in whom the need to punish is strong." (Confucius)
Or, if you are religious, "Revenge is mine said the Lord."

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 02 May 11 - 03:25 PM

Oh. Now I get it.
10 Year old kills 6 year old. Found guilty (No doubts)
The sentence....
You will go to jail, and on your 18th birthday, we'll hang you.
That's really nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 08:36 PM

////Civilised countries do not kill or jail children; what part of that do you not understand?////

Who are to dictate to me what a civilized country does or doesn't do? Have you read your country's history? Obviously not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 08:51 PM

/////Oh. Now I get it.
10 Year old kills 6 year old. Found guilty (No doubts)
The sentence....
You will go to jail, and on your 18th birthday, we'll hang you.
That's really nice./////

Like the other fellow, you're oversimplifying so that your own views make sense, which they don't in the real world.

This particular murder was savage, it was beyond two kids not knowing what they were doing to this boy. The atrocities unleashed on him demonstrates that they knew precisely how badly they were hurting him and wanted it to hurt him in the worst way. It was a murder of the type where it is plain the perpetrators are extremely dangerous individuals--psychopaths of worst type. Psychopaths cannot be rehabilitated.

And it's not so much that they received virtually no punishment at all for what they did, it's that they were unleashed back on society with new, secret identities unwatched, unsupervised as though they matter more than decent people who didn't do what they did. Because the "civilized British society" holds its murderers in higher esteeem than innocent people as the Calvert episode demonstrates. It's what you believe and it's what Jim Carroll believes---sadistic killers are more valuable to society than decent people and if anyone disagrees and thinks they shoudl be eliminated so that they can't damage society any worse than they have already done then they are obviously not civilized.

You moralistic cowards. Afraid to do what's right because when it's all said and done, what you're really you're afraid of is that some big, bad god up in heaven will be mad at you. And it really is as simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:57 PM

Fellas, it's useless to play the violin in front of an ox.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:22 PM

Or even in front of a donkey.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:46 PM

josepp: Unlike many here, I do see where you are coming from. I share your indignation at the excessive leniency that has been shown to those unspeakable young people and your rage that they should have been shown more consideration by society (and for that matter by some posters on this thread) than their victim or his family.

I nevertheless remain convinced that your proposed solution would go too far in the other direction, in both its excessive severity and its impracticality.

I repeat that, tho I am not implacably opposed to capital punishment in any conceivable situation, I consider it would have to be used with utmost circumspection and care; and that 10-yr-olds could not in any circumstances be considered liable to it ~ either forthwith or after a measured delay. I repeat that the fitting penalty in this unhappy case would have been something on the lines of their being held for their entire lives in highly disciplined, tho not inhumane, confinement ~~ as I said before, permanently held in conditions not unlike being permanently under armed services basic training ~~ & never to be allowed any hope of being released, whatever progress they may appear to make personality-wise or contrition they might express.

And the expense of all this would have to be met by society as part of its responsibilities to all its citizens, even those who have placed themselves beyond its zone of acceptability at too early an age to pay the ultimate penalty.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 12:21 AM

Ok, fine, you pay for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 01:43 AM

As a UK citizen that is precisely what he does! Unlike you, as you are a US citzen are you not?
Unlike the US, we don't have capital punishment here.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 01:53 AM

As a matter of curiosity, I was wondering how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment (I'm assuming that all nations have used it in the past) and to what extent Capital Punishment continues to be carried out in religious nations compared to more secular nations?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:36 AM

Indeed, josepp, were that scenario I outlined indeed the case then, as Lively said, I would pay for it thru my taxes. That is what citizens do, what taxes are for; and I am sure we all could find things we do not approve of our money going on, but we elect governments to make these decisions for us.

So don't be so naïf.

Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme. You are coming over more & more as a peculiarly objectionable piece of work, I fear.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:58 AM

" Who are to dictate to me what a civilized country does or doesn't do?"
I don't ''dictate' what a civilised country does - that's what happens, an what has happened for a long tome - we got ourselves civilised.
Nor do I weigh the value of one individual's life against another; I was brought up to value all life and I believe the taking of any life is wrong - by individuals or by the state. The idea of killing someone because they have killed is a ludicrous contradiction and one of the reasons it was abandoned.
Another reason for abandoning it was the unreliability of reaching a guilty verdict - over the last 20 - odd years Britain has imprisoned over a dozen people for murder who have later been proven innocent.
Agree with you about one thing though - any nation that sanctions the killing of children is barbaric, and imprisoning them for a length of time before doing so, as in the US, is barbarians being barbaric.
"how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment?"
Lively -quick shufti -
87 countries have abandoned it altogether, 27 retain it but don't use it.
All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.
The main countries to use it are: Afghanistan, the Bahamas, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, North and South Korea, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam."
It is mostly to be found in Asia and Africa and the United States (in 38 states, the rest having totally abolished it).
The first country to abolish it was Venezuela in 1863; most recent was the Philippines in June of 2006.
Seems the world is moving in the right direction.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:33 AM

===All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.===

I am not so disingenuous as to pretend I don't know what you mean here, Jim. But a "European country" actually simply means one geographically situated in Europe, and "membership" doesn't come into it. If you refer to the EU or whatever the hell they call it these days as an alliance or trading-group or whatever the hell it is supposed to be these days, then membership is voluntary, and I am by no means the only person who thinks it was a grievous error ever to join & we can't get out too quickly ~~ not least because of the insistence of that organisation in sticking its long prodnose into our laws and legal systems. I realise that I am whistling down the wind in this particular, however ~~ more's the pity.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:42 AM

You make Brussels sound nearly as bad as Westminster.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 05:10 AM

Not sure whether the whole of Europe has abandoned the barbarism of state killing - I think/hope it has, but it wasn't my intention to mislead - just a hurried seection.
The E.U. is a matter of opinion - curate's egg as far as I'm concerned; Ireland has done quite well out of it and, following the predatory big business/corrupt-and-inept-politicians made crisis, would be deep in the klarts had it not been for the bail-out.
Personally, I go along with Dave MacKenzie's Tweedledum - Tweedledee analysis - none of them ever bother consulting us chickens in the matter of who gets sent for the chop.
Regarding the not-quiet-late, not by any means lamented C.P., 87 countries is a giant step for civilisastion as far as I'm concerned - may its demise be swift and final.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 03 May 11 - 11:25 AM

I've just been watching Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and part way through I was reminded of this thread. In Flint, a six year old girl had been shot by a six year old boy who had found a gun in his uncle's home, where he and his mother were living because they had been evicted. His mother had not seen him off to school because she was forced to travel a long way under Welfare to Work schemes, which she needed because the local employer, Lockheed Martin, had closed its plant.

The NRA turned up for a rally led by Charlton Heston, despite being asked not to go there, because it was a "free country" and they could go anywhere they wanted. Later, Heston would not answer Moore about why this had been done, claiming it was only coincidence, as was the rally at Columbine, and refusing to look at the picture of the girl.

It was, apparently, largely NRA members who wrote to the local law enforcers, demanding the killing of the six year old. And a lot of them. The officer concerned was appalled by this.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:38 PM

I'm well acquainted with the case it does not apply to Venables and Thompson. I have never believed that boy should have been imprisoned much less executed. He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school. The girl was shot and killed. Her uncle was on the news weeping blaming it on lack of prayer in the schools. She wasn't abducted and tortured by this boy. It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights so who am I to demand anything be done to this boy? He clearly didn't understand what he was doing. Venables and Thompson are a different story.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:43 PM

"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."

So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.

"It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights"

How nice for you all..

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:46 PM

////Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme.///

You're an idiot if you said what you did just to give me support. You think I need you?? I have my views and I don't give a damn who likes them--including you. I expect you to express what you feel regardless of whether it supports me or not--which I don't care if it does. get with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:49 PM

////"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.////

Hey, if you want to execute him--go ahead. You have your view and I have mine. I don't care why he took the gun to school, he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse. but if you want him execute him--fine with me--go ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:56 PM

"he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse."

Thank you for the clarification Josepp.
So if six is "too young" for you, then at what point in your view does a child eventually "know what they are doing", and why?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:00 PM

Certainly brings them all out of the woodwork, doesn't it?
Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:05 PM

When they abduct a helpless victim and torture him and murder him for no reason than to hurt him. If a 6-year-old can do that--he's guilty too. But most 6-year-olds can't. In the case of this boy, there's no evidence he tried to kill anybody. He took a gun to school because this is America where we LOVE guns. It happened again not long ago--a 9-year-old took a gun to school. It fell out of his backpack and discharged wounding another student. If America is willing to tolerate this for the sake of gun rights then fuck em. You get what you pay for.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:11 PM

"Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?"

I sure am at that. As well as the fact we don't execute our citizens of course. Josepp seems to find views opposing state sponsored killing troubling, as such perhaps he's be happier in a third world country? He would get a lot more public fun of that kind (or so I've heard) in dusty places which lack basic sanitation and education.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:12 PM

We had a case in Jonesboro, Arkansas where two boys--an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old--cold-bloodedly shot and killed several classmates and a teacher. They stole guns from one the boy's grandparents and took them on school grounds. One boy pulled the fire alarm and when the students filed out, they opened fire on them. I believe this was in '98.

Because of their age, they too received a slap on the wrist and both are now free. The difference is, neither was given a secret ID and protected by the govt. One was later arrested on weapons charges as a teen or young adult. I'm not sure what has since happened to the other. Nobody has tried to kill them or exact any revenge that I know of. They are as free as anyone else. But they are not protected. They have to live with the consequences of what they did. If someone kills them then someone kills them--boo-hoo.

Yes, I would have executed them on their 18th birthdays but that's just me. Why don't I go kill them now? Because I'm not the law. If I was, they'd be dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:32 PM

There was a time when we deported them to the colonies, though I'm not wholly convinced that was a good idea either.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 03 May 11 - 04:04 PM

And the trees of Africa are still full of pre humans.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 04 May 11 - 12:14 AM

////There was a time when we deported them to the colonies, though I'm not wholly convinced that was a good idea either.////

That was how the world got saddled with Australia.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 04 May 11 - 12:19 AM

////Thank you for the clarification Josepp.
So if six is "too young" for you, then at what point in your view does a child eventually "know what they are doing", and why?////

I guess we know who doesn't have kids.

(That was said to me--so before you open you start complaining about how mean I am...)

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 02:30 AM

"I guess we know who doesn't have kids."
Other than the suggestion that two ten-year-old children be either executed or locked up for life, there has been very little discussion on who is to blame for this horrific affair.
Doesn't it cross the minds of you hangers and floggers that if some people who have children had done their job in the first place and brought them up properly, we might not be having this discussion?
Having kids doesn't give anybody a special insight or wisdom - it just makes them experts on changing shitty nappies.   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 04 May 11 - 02:53 AM

I was very scared by the part in the "Columbine" movie..."Hey, open a bank account with us, and we'll give you a rifle" How bonkers is that. What is it with you people in America, that you feel you have the right to own a gun?
In the rest of the civilised world, the owning of a gun is incredibly well monitored (as far as it can be).
In 56 years, I have never, knowingly, met anyone who owned a gun, and wouldn't be very happy about it, if I did. Yet, Americans seem to revel in it. The question I pose is ....Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 03:46 AM

A couple of years ago we were told on the radio by American journalist Mary Ellen Synon, that it was the DUTY of every rural Irishman to carry a gun to protect their property and family.
The same journalist had earlier lost her contract with The Irish Times for describing Ireland's paraolympics (an annual sporting event for the disabled) as 'grotesque' - says everything that needs to be said really!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:20 AM

You think I need you?? I have my views and I don't give a damn who likes them--including you. ===

So commune with yourself, you boring little yobbo

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:22 AM

Nice one M!

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:26 AM

Ralphie, our right to own guns is in the constitution. It is there because of the way the British government treated our colonists back in the 18th century. What started the shooting was when the red coats marched to Lexington and Concord to confiscate the farmer's rifles and powder.
At that time, rural America was a hostile place and without a gun you didn't live long.
Sure, that was then and this is now, but once it was written into the constitution it became part of our guaranteed rights and it takes 2/3 of congress to amend the constitution and get rid of that right. There are plenty of people who would do that today thinking if that right was removed from the bill of rights that crime would go away. Rubbish! Crooks, murderers, bank robbers would love to have a huge population of unarmed victims.

Guns are not the problem, attitude is the problem. How do you change attitude?
So, the gun problem can be traced back to our English roots. THEY are the ones who made that right necessary.
You may disagree or find fault but I answered your question.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:35 AM

Ahh ....right.

So, let me get this straight. Guns are not a problem.

There is a lot of guncrime in America, but it is all OUR fault here in the UK.

That makes sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 11:31 AM

Having kids doesn't give anybody a special insight or wisdom - it just makes them experts on changing shitty nappies.

It gives them an insight into how other people with kids might think.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 01:03 PM

Don't flatter yourself Silas, it's not about you or any other Brit who had nothing to do with the revolution.
I understand that there is a lot of knife crime in the UK. Would you rather be shot or stabbed? If the yobs had guns they would use them; they don't so they use knives.

Our Police carry guns not to protect us, but to protect themselves.
We carry guns because cops are too heavy.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 01:15 PM

Kendall, honestly!

You think we should take knives away from these people and give them guns because it is better to be stabbed than shot?

Get real man. Knife crime in the UK is a problem, but nowhere near as big a problem as you may think, we still live in a country where a stabbing makes national headline news...

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 05:46 PM

Gun and knife crime in the UK nowadays generally only gets reported when it involves innocent members of the public. Most people are oblivious to the full scale of it but the majority is confined to certain areas which are every bit as bad as anything the US has to offer. The strict controls we have on firearms licencing means there is a thriving market in illegal and unregistered weapons and they are fairly easy to acquire. I'm not sure whether that's a good or a bad thing, but it's certainly a mistake to underestimate the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:10 PM

"It gives them an insight into how other people with kids might think. "
No it does not - families develop as small units, not communities and are totally defensive as to the behaviour of their own.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:15 PM

I see one of them back in the news tonight.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/breach-sees-child-killer-venables-id-144410826.html

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:16 PM

I expect you know best, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:20 PM

Silas, I suggested no such thing. Jeeez.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 02:01 AM

"I expect you know best, Jim."
Until some of you come up with answers as to an alternative beyond lynching and banging them up indefinitly, we have to hope the law knows best - it's difficult to find trees with tough enough branches to take the weight of bodies around here.
Nice to know that another piece of news fodder has been put out of reach of 'The Daily Wail' and 'The Scum' Richie.
Any sign of that evidence yet - good job I didn't hold my breath??
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 05 May 11 - 01:02 PM

'The law' gave them life sentences, if I remember rightly. I have no problem with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 01:07 PM

The law has now dealt with them as it sees fit - you can't pick and choose. - the alternative is trial by media.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:32 PM

Not the only alternative, Jim: one can criticise the law; and if necessary take a stand against it. I suspect you would be more sympathetic to the activities of the Chartists, Militant Suffragettes, &c, than some others might. Some of the stands taken might be inappropriate ~ or worse, like those of that mulish fool josepp ~ but I cannot feel your last, somewhat cop-out, post quite consistent with the generality of your declared views & attitudes.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:44 PM

Sorry Mike - have to disagree again
You can think your way into and out of all sorts of opinions and philosophies when you have plenty of facts at your fingetips. What you have here, as with the Mary Bell case, is extremely limited information on the case itself and its aftermath, and what little we do have is deeply tainted by a mob-rule press intent on selling newspapers via a call for revenge.
In those circumstances, and given the legal situation as it stands at the present time, I'm prepared to leave it to the experts, despite the doubts I have about the system.
I do have a fairl long-term interest in this case because of where it happened and particularly where Jamie Bulger came from - but I still feel I know far too little about it to take the definitive stance some people have here - vcan't help but notice you harbour some of the same doubts.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:45 PM

A ten year old boy shot and killed his Neo-Nazi father in America today.I doubt many will mourn his loss. God alone knows what this poor child must been subjected to.


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/boy-10-shoots-dead-neo-nazi-father-075358848.html

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:47 PM

Sorry, he died on Sunday, not today as I said above.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 May 11 - 11:31 PM

Jim: yes indeed, I do share some of your doubts, in particular those re some of the suggestions made as to how these young people should have been disposed of. But I do not feel that what was ultimately done was right either ~~ certainly released too early, before they could have been thought of as adequately punished IMO; & what I was calling attention to was your implication that none of us knows anything about the case which would entitle us to state objections, and that to do so would make us all slavering *extreme-Mail-reading vengeance-seekers. I felt your statement "you can't pick and choose. - the alternative is trial by media" went too far to the other extreme.

Best

~Michael~

*I express it thus [no pun intended] because I think the Mail can often speak good sense representing some not-too-extreme middle-England views, & does not altogether deserve the obloquy many on this forum fling at it as a sort of reflex. Most of its journalistic standards are perfectly adequate imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 11 - 02:28 AM

"your implication that none of us knows anything about the case which would entitle us to state objections,"
I don't think I said this Mike - my reaction was to the definitive solutions being offered here - personally I accept neither executing (neither do you), nor banging away for life; the idea that you might lock two children/young men up in a secure unit alongside hardened adult criminals and then release them into the world at an unspecified date with all the skills and ideas they would have gained inside fills me with horror, especially after what they did.
I really don't think our system is constructed to cope with crimes like this, so you either go with the knee-jerk and punish them as adults (revenge), or leave it to the experts; not a great choice either way, but I can't think of another.
"adequately punished"
I find the the older I get, the less my desire for revenge on wrongdoers, especially young people, otherwise I would find myself permanently stationed in the lane outside our house with a half brick, waiting for the next ton-up boy-racer who uses this narrow road as a race-track and makes our lives a misery and it virtually impossible to let children out or keep domestic pets.
I feel we spent our lives (mine anyway) with a justice system heavily biased towards punishment and almost totally ignoring reform; things have changed and I'm willing to give it a go, especially with children and young teenagers.
I suppose that in the end it's down to whether you believe that these two are any different from any other child who commits a crime and thumbs their noses to the authorities because of their age; in my experience they all do it and despite the enormity and horror of their crime - I don't.
As far as press involvement is concerned, I long for the days when you could pick up a newspaper an read the news, even with an identifiable spin on it. Nowadays it takes me about a quarter-of-an-hour to read the news and the rest of the day doing the crossword.
Best back,
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 May 11 - 04:46 AM

As I have aid before, Jim: I regard punishment as a most negative concept. So do many people. But we have spent æons, from Socrates/Plato onwards, lucubrating & agonising over it without anyone, or any society, coming up with a better idea ~~ even do-gooding societies from Levellers to Quakers to Flower·children have retained the ultimate sanction of exclusion from the group for those who would not conform to the expected societal norms. 'Punishment' seems to be one of those reflex responses embedded in the human psyche; and even if one tries, or pretends, to prioritise the reformative & deterrent elements over those of revenge, there was in most breasts, however hidden, some feeling of satisfaction when a sadistic multi-murderer got the drop or a thug who had coshed an old lady for 6d got a dozen lashes. OK, so these last penalties have vanished from our system, and perhaps a good thing too; but I can understand by trying to apply a bit of empathy why some regret this. Honest now ~ can't you? Just a teeny-weeny itty-bitty bit?

A bit of a drift, perhaps; but I think this argument has been much prolepsised and canvassed on this thread already, so perhaps it can stay here and some might wish to respond in the more general terms I have rubricated, which seem to me to emerge naturally on this thread and not to over-broaden it.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 May 11 - 11:58 PM

So ~~ no-one anything to add directly on either the efficacy or the psychopatholagy of punishment as such?

Surprised.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:09 AM

"A bit of a drift, perhaps"
Not really - and I accept your point to a degree.
Our first instinct is punishment/revenge - from eye-for-an-eye to the grotesque ritual of trial-sentence-imprisonment-appeal-execution that was (and still is in parts of the world - I understand that some on Texas death rows have been there for up to thirty years) capital punishment.
Some of us, once we've had time to reflect, suggest that reform might be a better path and are willing to give it a go - I think that is what has happened to British society, and personally I welcome it.
But in the end, none of this alters the fact that these two were ten years old when they did what they did, and nobody here has even begun to approach the suggestion that they might just be monsters of our making.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:11 AM

Meant to say - only just noticed your response - can't speak for the rest - sorry.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 11 - 05:37 AM

And, again, Jim, I accept your point to a degree also, re the fact that they were only 10; but must reiterate that I do not think that the actual time served begins to address the enormity of the offence in question at whatever age it might have been committed.

Any more comments on the concept of punishment as such, as requested in my last 2 posts

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:58 PM

I don't think revenge has been the motivation of the British penal system for some while, but there are a lingering few who fail to realise that it is impossible to run a judicial system according to gut reactions. I do feel, however, that the release of the two in question was premature. Their age at the time doesn't improve the nature of the crime, and by the time they were 18 they should have been old enough to understand the seriousness of it and why they should be in prison.