James Bulger - sentencing

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

I'm a college professor and in my lectures this sometimes come up for debate when we talk about the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child, where is specifically mentions that children under the age of 18 cannot be subject to the death penalty.

Most of my students weren't even born when this happened, so I have to fill them in on the case and ask them what should have been done for Thompson and Venables, most agree that because they were 10, a lifetime in jail isn't the solution but neither is getting out at the age of 18.

I read that during their times in their group homes, Thompson's family regularly visited him every Sunday and they cooked meals together and although his family wasn't perfect, his mother was apparently always in touch and there for him.

An interesting idea that was brought up once, was having them have to work the rest of their lives to repay society, so cover the food and meals and have them work for free at a senior's residence or somewhere in an under-serviced area.

My heart breaks for Denise Fergus, she worries every day that they could be lurking about with their new identities.

I think that’s a really strange idea tbh. What’s the point? Have them work for free in an old people’s home for life? What if they were crap at it? Misbehaved? Mistreated the residents? Why would elderly people deserve jon venables serving up their dinner?

it’s not even productive- to repay their keep in prison- Why? Seems a really odd thing to decide 2 child murderers should do. Im not sure we’d all feel better knowing they were working for free Plus how would they pay for their own ongoing food and accommodations if they didn’t earn any money?

 

[Rxt156]

I think that’s a really strange idea tbh. What’s the point? Have them work for free in an old people’s home for life? What if they were crap at it? Misbehaved? Mistreated the staff? Why would elderly people deserve jon venables serving U.K. their dinner?

it’s not even productive- to repay their keep in prison- Why? Seems a really odd thing to decide 2 child murderers should do. Im not sure we’d all feel better knowing they were working for free Plus how would
they pay for their own food and accommodations if they didn’t earn any money?

They took the life of a 2 year old. Their punishment doesn’t seem enough. I don’t know if I agree with the suggestion either but there should’ve been some other punishment than freedom aged 18 .

 

[LittleMy]

I think the last thing anybody needs or deserves is one of those guys serving their dinner. They should be in prison for life otherwise where is the justice for little James who’s life was horrifically taken?

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

Working in an old people’s home isn’t a punishment!

 

[LittleMy]

Working in an old people’s home isn’t a punishment!

Exactly. They should never be allowed near vulnerable people.

 

[Edgewood]

There are other jobs in a senior's residence, such as landscaping. But, yes, placing them with vulnerable people isn't the best idea, I was just mentioning what my students have suggested.

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

I mean I assume your students are young so maybe they’re just naive but I’m really surprised if that attitude is normal- just get them to do “something” that makes the public feel vaguely better about the fact they murdered a boy with no thought as to what it actually means in reality, or what the point even is?

 

[Rxt156]

I can sort of see what they were getting at. There should be some sort of payback (community service I believe is what the above posted was learning towards?) for what they did- in whatever form- as their sentences were not long enough as freedom at 18 years old seems unjust.

It was only a statement anyway. No one is making this happen it’s only one persons idea so let’s untwist the knicks and carry on.

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

There are no knickers in twist, I just don’t understand ideas like this. They’re murders on life tariffs. Community service is a punishment for shoplifters.

Also I do find it really odd when people’s idea of punishment is to get them to do something other people do as jobs. That’s not on

 

[Rxt156]

You seem to have taken a lot of offence to someone else’s idea.

Litter picking is also someone’s job but that can be community service too.

People are horrified at the short sentences therefore feel like something else should have been done and in whatever form that may have taken it’s better than being released aged 18 after murdering a small child.

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

I’m out offended at all. I just think it’s pointless. And no suggestions to explain the point have been offered apart from- “do something” to punish them further.

being released on a life tariff makes a bit of litter picking a walk in the park. Do people realise how serious their crimes are?

 

[LittleMy]

I can sort of see what they were getting at. There should be some sort of payback (community service I believe is what the above posted was learning towards?) for what they did- in whatever form- as their sentences were not long enough as freedom at 18 years old seems unjust.

It was only a statement anyway. No one is making this happen it’s only one persons idea so let’s untwist the knicks and carry on.

Knickers aren’t twisted thanks.

I work with vulnerable people and feel very strongly about this case. I’d hate to think that I could be working alongside one of them. I am also aware that it was just a statement but the fact that they’re out there at all living relatively normal lives whilst James’ family members are left to grieve the life he won’t have because of them really sickens me. The case has always stuck with me, but even more so when I have young sons myself, one of a similar age as James was.

 

[Edgewood]

I'm in Canada and to work with children or the elderly or vulnerable people, you have to have a clear criminal reference check, which means even if you were investigated for a crime, but not charged, shows up and will mean that your record is not clear. It prevents people who have committed crimes in the past from working with vulnerable people. The problem is that unless you get one done every year, you could still have a clear criminal record on paper, but the next day commit a murder but still show your clear police check from the day before. Recently there was a man who had a sexual assault charge working at a daycare centre but his police check from previous months showed he was clear. Now daycares ask you to sign that you have not been arrested for a crime since your last police check.

 

[Rxt156]

I’m out offended at all. I just think it’s pointless. And no suggestions to explain the point have been offered apart from- “do something” to punish them further.

being released on a life tariff makes a bit of litter picking a walk in the park. Do people realise how serious their crimes are?

Of course people reside how serious the crimes are!!!! That is why being released at 18 doesn’t seem enough and people feel that they shouldn’t have their freedom which James does not

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

they were released 20 years ago. if you look at the situation objectively, the reason this case is famous in everyone’s mind is their age. We are not having these conversations about the many other murderers of both children and adults. We don’t even know the details of most of those cases. They haven’t ever been publicised. We dont think about them at all.

yet these young boys - 30 years on, people are still talking about what their punishment should’ve been. As if the public know better than the justice system.

you’d expect, after all this time, people would’ve started asking more questions, more useful and interesting questions. what happens to 2 10 year olds to result in them murdering a baby? Was it appropriate to interview and detain them the way we did? Was it to publish their names and photos? Who benefitted from that? Would the bulger family be better off now, 30 years on, if the media circus around their sons murder hadnt happened?

I personally think they’re the conversations that should happen now. Not that we should somehow go back 20 years and not release them

 

[Purrrrrrr]

they were released 20 years ago. if you look at the situation objectively, the reason this case is famous in everyone’s mind is their age. We are not having these conversations about the many other murderers of both children and adults. We don’t even know the details of most of those cases. They haven’t ever been publicised. We dont think about them at all.

yet these young boys - 30 years on, people are still talking about what their punishment should’ve been. As if the public know better than the justice system.

you’d expect, after all this time, people would’ve started asking more questions, more useful and interesting questions. what happens to 2 10 year olds to result in them murdering a baby? Was it appropriate to interview and detain them the way we did? Was it to publish their names and photos? Who benefitted from that? Would the bulger family be better off now, 30 years on, if the media circus around their sons murder hadnt happened?

I personally think they’re the conversations that should happen now. Not that we should somehow go back 20 years and not release them

As I said at the beginning. The judge should never have named them. This carries on and on because he named them. James's family don't get any peace because he named them. I wonder if he regrets doing that.

 

[Be More Pacific]

As I said at the beginning. The judge should never have named them. This carries on and on because he named them. James's family don't get any peace because he named them. I wonder if he regrets doing that.

100% this.

And he absolutely should. It was a terrible, terrible mistake.

 

[Rxt156]

yet these young boys - 30 years on, people are still talking about what their punishment should’ve been. As if the public know better than the justice system.

Oh yes the justice system is always reliable and never gets it wrong!

Lots of people having the same opinion must stand for something.

It’s far too late for these discussion now but they were happening at the time too

As I said at the beginning. The judge should never have named them. This carries on and on because he named them. James's family don't get any peace because he named them. I wonder if he regrets doing that.

What was his reason for naming them?

 

[Eltonjohnsflorist]

I agree, it was an awful mistake

 

[Be More Pacific]

What was his reason for naming them?

"A decision that he took with the intention of provoking a 'full and frank' public discussion of youth crime."

Trial and tribulations -- in 1993 Jon Venables and Robert Thompson killed James Bulger; the court drama and whether the killers should be allowed anonymity

www.lawgazette.co.uk