BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables

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