Would you want to confront someone who murdered your child? I certainly wouldn't.
Denise owes them and/or anyone nothing at all. She doesn't need to meet them to be able to sentence them.
She has no ability to sentence them. Never did have, never will have. We do not have sharia law in this country where victims families get to decide the punishment. If you want that system, move to Saudi Arabia.
I think the opening post is aimed at people like me who, as sad as the whole situation is, think Denise Fergus needs to stop raking up the whole thing, again and again, year in year out.
They were 10 or 11 when they did it for Christ's sake.. they don't deserve the death penalty or anything else.
They did their time. I see the time they served as broadly fair given the ages they committed their crimes; as horrific as they were.
Two very screwed up little boys who became very screwed up blokes from the sounds of things. They needed (and may still continue to need) intensive psychiatric help, not the death penalty.
The continued publicity of Denise Fergus (including wading into Hollyoaks story-lines as I remember amongst other things?) is just simply unhelpful and every time I see her on the BBC News front page now I just lose a little bit more sympathy for her, and gain just a little bit more sympathy for her sons killers. Let them just get on with their lives best they can and she should try to get on with hers best she can.
No doubt this post will not go down well..
I agree with a lot of what you've said and applaud you for being brave enough to say it.
She has no ability to sentence them. Never did have, never will have. We do not have sharia law in this country where victims families get to decide the punishment. If you want that system, move to Saudi Arabia.
I don't want "that" system. I just want what any decent member of society wants, justice. And I'm not talking about this crime (as it's of no personal attachment to me) but I mean in general. No one expects to be attached and/or involved such serious crimes but sometimes it happens, the least we should be able to console ourselves with is lengthy sentences worthy of the crime committed. When someone murders someone in such a brutal thought out way, they deserve a very long sentence. Not 8 years and a new identity.
The problem with this tracy is that no sentence is long enough. That is the sheer bloody awfulness of murder. One side will always be left bereft. No penalty will be enough - even the death penalty.
And we have a law in this country (the Children and Young People's Act) that says retributive justice should be secondary to a child's welfare when they commit crimes. It is a GOOD law and one, frankly, we should be bloody proud of - it being written in 1933 before the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The idea that a child is different to an adult under criminal law goes back to the middle ages (when doli incapax was brought into British justice).
I don't want "that" system. I just want what any decent member of society wants, justice. And I'm not talking about this crime (as it's of no personal attachment to me) but I mean in general. No one expects to be attached and/or involved such serious crimes but sometimes it happens, the least we should be able to console ourselves with is lengthy sentences worthy of the crime committed. When someone murders someone in such a brutal thought out way, they deserve a very long sentence. Not 8 years and a new identity.
Why do you take it so personally? Justice for James? Or to make yourself somehow feel better?
Any prison sentence could have been given, 2 years or 20 and it wouldn't have made much difference. Going into Young Offenders at the age of 11 must have messed them up even more. (For those not in the know: YOI considered worse than adult prisons). It's the type of environment where you're either raped or become a rapist.. either way.. not great for society..
The day they were sentenced to any prison term it was likely to finish their lives off. It does sound as if at least one of them isn't remotely repaired or rehabilitated, probably because of that.
And anonymity wouldn't be necessary if it wasn't for all of the muppets wishing to take the law into their own hands. Based on the way you say it I also get the impression you think they would have enjoyed becoming anonymous, getting new names etc. Let me tell you now that it is probably one of the more damaging aspects of the whole thing.
How can they ever live a normal life again?
'Not such a bad thing' I hear you say but just looking at it pragmatically.. why would you want them to suffer for the rest of their lives? How much would it take for people like you to ever be happy? (because no doubt you still wouldn't be happy even if they were suffering eternal damnation)
It might be enough for Denise that these pair will never feel safe while she is alive.
If that's the case she could stop now. Sadly I don't think anything will be enough for Denise (not a criticism and I've no idea how I'd feel) but it's not as if her relentless campaign makes her particularly happy. To hang on to all this and to keep going for revenge will, I believe destroy her. I'm not saying she has to forget about her little boy but in campaigning she is constantly reliving the horrible stuff - constantly has Venables and Thompson in her head.
It might be nice to step back and enjoy her children and dwell on all that was lovely and positive.
As I say - I'm not her, who knows what we ourselves woiuld do.
I think the opening post is aimed at people like me who, as sad as the whole situation is, think Denise Fergus needs to stop raking up the whole thing, again and again, year in year out.
They were 10 or 11 when they did it for Christ's sake.. they don't deserve the death penalty or anything else.
They did their time. I see the time they served as broadly fair given the ages they committed their crimes; as horrific as they were.
Two very screwed up little boys who became very screwed up blokes from the sounds of things. They needed (and may still continue to need) intensive psychiatric help, not the death penalty.
The continued publicity of Denise Fergus (including wading into Hollyoaks story-lines as I remember amongst other things?) is just simply unhelpful and every time I see her on the BBC News front page now I just lose a little bit more sympathy for her, and gain just a little bit more sympathy for her sons killers. Let them just get on with their lives best they can and she should try to get on with hers best she can.
To which, of course, the response is never going to be anything other than "Well, little Jamie was robbed of the opportunity for a normal life".
True, but looking at it on a factual level, taking what is good for society/the majority into account..
The less rehabilitated they are the bigger drain they will be on society as they will find it hard to access employment and in turn will require social welfare.
I'm not sure whether sending them to a YOI was good for them, the Bulger family or society. And if that's the case, then why do it? Because it was trial by tabloid.
They should have been put anonymised, put into care and received serious, intensive therapy/help. The case shouldn't have ever received a fraction of the attention it did. If anybody should have been blamed and had a court case surround them it should have been T&V's parents, not them.
The whole thing just makes me despair. Far too much schadenfreud from all sides muddying the waters.
if Denise doesn't keep campaigning nobody else will.
The soft liberal viewpoint in this country is appalling. I hope one day we recognize that the death penalty is not "cruel and unusual", and is restored.
The day this country imposes the death penalty on 10-year-olds will be a very sad one.
The problem with this tracy is that no sentence is long enough. That is the sheer bloody awfulness of murder. One side will always be left bereft. No penalty will be enough - even the death penalty.
And we have a law in this country (the Children and Young People's Act) that says retributive justice should be secondary to a child's welfare when they commit crimes. It is a GOOD law and one, frankly, we should be bloody proud of - it being written in 1933 before the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The idea that a child is different to an adult under criminal law goes back to the middle ages (when doli incapax was brought into British justice).
What an excellent post. I can hardly believe the people who demand the death penalty for young children, or (a particularly nasty variation on the theme) suggest that they should have been imprisoned until they were 18 and then executed.
And anonymity wouldn't be necessary if it wasn't for all of the muppets wishing to take the law into their own hands. Based on the way you say it I also get the impression you think they would have enjoyed becoming anonymous, getting new names etc. Let me tell you now that it is probably one of the more damaging aspects of the whole thing.
Yes, there is something truly revolting about the slavering eagerness of some tabloid papers to reveal their names and addresses, presumably so they can have the thrill of watching them brutally murdered in their turn. Thank HEAVENS for the rule of law, which does not allow people to become fair game for every thug in Britain to attack.
'Not such a bad thing' I hear you say but just looking at it pragmatically.. why would you want them to suffer for the rest of their lives? How much would it take for people like you to ever be happy? (because no doubt you still wouldn't be happy even if they were suffering eternal damnation)
Like Myra Hindley, they have become disturbingly iconic, and with less reason. She was at least an adult, and had participated in multiple murders. Over 1000 children have been murdered in Britain over the last 20 years. Who can name ANY of the killers? Who knows what sentences they got?
The most disquieting aspect of Denise Fergus's campaign is the effect, which she admits herself, it has on her ability to be a good mother. I remember years earlier a young girl being abducted, raped and murdered in Yorkshire, and her mother being asked in an interview if she would let her younger daughter play out. "Of course I would," said that heroic woman. "YOu have to let children play out."
I am not attacking Denise Fergus, who has been handed more than she can handle; I am attacking the press for constantly presenting her way as the right way, indeed as the only way. There is a reason why participants in The Forgiveness Project, many of whom have also had children murdered, talk about reclaiming their lives. They are not talking about forgiveness in an 'oh it doesn't matter' sense, but in an 'I won't let it destroy any more lives' sense.
The best result for the world will surely be if both young men manage to live their lives as good citizens from this point on. Venables should be dealt with realistically, as with any other prisoner, not treated as a member of an alien species. And Thompson should be left in peace until there is reason not to.
If that's the case she could stop now. Sadly I don't think anything will be enough for Denise (not a criticism and I've no idea how I'd feel) but it's not as if her relentless campaign makes her particularly happy. To hang on to all this and to keep going for revenge will, I believe destroy her. I'm not saying she has to forget about her little boy but in campaigning she is constantly reliving the horrible stuff - constantly has Venables and Thompson in her head.
It might be nice to step back and enjoy her children and dwell on all that was lovely and positive.
As I say - I'm not her, who knows what we ourselves woiuld do.
True, but looking at it on a factual level, taking what is good for society/the majority into account..
The less rehabilitated they are the bigger drain they will be on society as they will find it hard to access employment and in turn will require social welfare.
I'm not sure whether sending them to a YOI was good for them, the Bulger family or society. And if that's the case, then why do it? Because it was trial by tabloid.
They should have been put anonymised, put into care and received serious, intensive therapy/help. The case shouldn't have ever received a fraction of the attention it did. If anybody should have been blamed and had a court case surround them it should have been T&V's parents, not them.
The whole thing just makes me despair. Far too much schadenfreud from all sides muddying the waters.
And the Judge who in his wisdom decided to 'name' them at the end of the trial. Why All through the trial they were known as Child A and Child B - why was it necessary to name them?
There would be no need for all this new identity stuff and security. They would still be monitored, still have parole conditions to adhere to but there wouldn't be a permanant security problem.
I think the opening post is aimed at people like me who, as sad as the whole situation is, think Denise Fergus needs to stop raking up the whole thing, again and again, year in year out.
They were 10 or 11 when they did it for Christ's sake.. they don't deserve the death penalty or anything else.
They did their time. I see the time they served as broadly fair given the ages they committed their crimes; as horrific as they were.
Two very screwed up little boys who became very screwed up blokes from the sounds of things. They needed (and may still continue to need) intensive psychiatric help, not the death penalty.
The continued publicity of Denise Fergus (including wading into Hollyoaks story-lines as I remember amongst other things?) is just simply unhelpful and every time I see her on the BBC News front page now I just lose a little bit more sympathy for her, and gain just a little bit more sympathy for her sons killers. Let them just get on with their lives best they can and she should try to get on with hers best she can.
No doubt this post will not go down well..
I agree with you.
I don't know what she's trying to achieve anymore?
Hopefully this is closely enough related that it won't be out of place...
The thing that always baffled me about the Bulger case was the psychological stuff.
Thompson and Venables were, IIRC, 10 years old at the time.
I'm open-minded enough to accept that a child of 10 might not yet have a grasp of the concept of murder (maybe) and, that being the case, they're capable of rehabilitation.
What I can't really understand is how all the various psychologists, psychiatrists and psychotherapists would not be able to determine whether a child who's been in their care for 7 years IS actually reformed or, alternatively, that a child as young as 10 could successfully deceive all these highly-trained individuals for the 7 years of their incarceration.
If we're to believe that IS the case then surely it suggests that the whole concept of psychology is fundamentally flawed and unreliable as a means of ensuring the safety of apparently reformed criminals?
And, of course, that being the case, the only remaining option IS to simply keep people banged-up for their entire lives for the safety of society.
I'd really like to think that it's possible to determine that a criminal IS reformed and is no longer a danger to society but the whole palava with Venables suggests an incredible fundamental failure in the field of psychology.
my understanding of the case was that a decision had to be made by judges when they got to 18 as to whether they transferred to adult prison or went free, the decision was that adult prison could undo the work that had so far been achieved in the secure units they were in and so further progress could be made in the community under supervision. remember they are both on licence for life, that wont change
so far, one of them has been recalled to prison and although on internet child porn offences, im not sure that is similar to the crime originally committed.
And the Judge who in his wisdom decided to 'name' them at the end of the trial. Why All through the trial they were known as Child A and Child B - why was it necessary to name them?
There would be no need for all this new identity stuff and security. They would still be monitored, still have parole conditions to adhere to but there wouldn't be a permanant security problem.
As importantly, there would have been none of the media coverage fuelling the fire. And it keeps fuelling it.
I daresay. Who wouldn't be? I just think she's not been helped/advised very well. I don't think she should be skipping around and jumping for joy but I do think she should be enjoying her family and burying the hatred and need for revenge.
I don't suppose her life could ever be 100% happy again - I do think she could be a lot happier than she is though.
And the Judge who in his wisdom decided to 'name' them at the end of the trial. Why All through the trial they were known as Child A and Child B - why was it necessary to name them?
There would be no need for all this new identity stuff and security. They would still be monitored, still have parole conditions to adhere to but there wouldn't be a permanant security problem.
Comments
Would you want to confront someone who murdered your child? I certainly wouldn't.
Denise owes them and/or anyone nothing at all. She doesn't need to meet them to be able to sentence them.
She has no ability to sentence them. Never did have, never will have. We do not have sharia law in this country where victims families get to decide the punishment. If you want that system, move to Saudi Arabia.
I agree with a lot of what you've said and applaud you for being brave enough to say it.
I don't want "that" system. I just want what any decent member of society wants, justice. And I'm not talking about this crime (as it's of no personal attachment to me) but I mean in general. No one expects to be attached and/or involved such serious crimes but sometimes it happens, the least we should be able to console ourselves with is lengthy sentences worthy of the crime committed. When someone murders someone in such a brutal thought out way, they deserve a very long sentence. Not 8 years and a new identity.
And we have a law in this country (the Children and Young People's Act) that says retributive justice should be secondary to a child's welfare when they commit crimes. It is a GOOD law and one, frankly, we should be bloody proud of - it being written in 1933 before the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The idea that a child is different to an adult under criminal law goes back to the middle ages (when doli incapax was brought into British justice).
Why do you take it so personally? Justice for James? Or to make yourself somehow feel better?
Any prison sentence could have been given, 2 years or 20 and it wouldn't have made much difference. Going into Young Offenders at the age of 11 must have messed them up even more. (For those not in the know: YOI considered worse than adult prisons). It's the type of environment where you're either raped or become a rapist.. either way.. not great for society..
The day they were sentenced to any prison term it was likely to finish their lives off. It does sound as if at least one of them isn't remotely repaired or rehabilitated, probably because of that.
And anonymity wouldn't be necessary if it wasn't for all of the muppets wishing to take the law into their own hands. Based on the way you say it I also get the impression you think they would have enjoyed becoming anonymous, getting new names etc. Let me tell you now that it is probably one of the more damaging aspects of the whole thing.
How can they ever live a normal life again?
'Not such a bad thing' I hear you say but just looking at it pragmatically.. why would you want them to suffer for the rest of their lives?
To which, of course, the response is never going to be anything other than "Well, little Jamie was robbed of the opportunity for a normal life".
If that's the case she could stop now. Sadly I don't think anything will be enough for Denise (not a criticism and I've no idea how I'd feel) but it's not as if her relentless campaign makes her particularly happy. To hang on to all this and to keep going for revenge will, I believe destroy her. I'm not saying she has to forget about her little boy but in campaigning she is constantly reliving the horrible stuff - constantly has Venables and Thompson in her head.
It might be nice to step back and enjoy her children and dwell on all that was lovely and positive.
As I say - I'm not her, who knows what we ourselves woiuld do.
I agree too. I honestly believe the only way she or anyone can find peace is to forgive them.
True, but looking at it on a factual level, taking what is good for society/the majority into account..
The less rehabilitated they are the bigger drain they will be on society as they will find it hard to access employment and in turn will require social welfare.
I'm not sure whether sending them to a YOI was good for them, the Bulger family or society. And if that's the case, then why do it? Because it was trial by tabloid.
They should have been put anonymised, put into care and received serious, intensive therapy/help. The case shouldn't have ever received a fraction of the attention it did. If anybody should have been blamed and had a court case surround them it should have been T&V's parents, not them.
The whole thing just makes me despair. Far too much schadenfreud from all sides muddying the waters.
The day this country imposes the death penalty on 10-year-olds will be a very sad one.
Like Myra Hindley, they have become disturbingly iconic, and with less reason. She was at least an adult, and had participated in multiple murders. Over 1000 children have been murdered in Britain over the last 20 years. Who can name ANY of the killers? Who knows what sentences they got?
The most disquieting aspect of Denise Fergus's campaign is the effect, which she admits herself, it has on her ability to be a good mother. I remember years earlier a young girl being abducted, raped and murdered in Yorkshire, and her mother being asked in an interview if she would let her younger daughter play out. "Of course I would," said that heroic woman. "YOu have to let children play out."
I am not attacking Denise Fergus, who has been handed more than she can handle; I am attacking the press for constantly presenting her way as the right way, indeed as the only way. There is a reason why participants in The Forgiveness Project, many of whom have also had children murdered, talk about reclaiming their lives. They are not talking about forgiveness in an 'oh it doesn't matter' sense, but in an 'I won't let it destroy any more lives' sense.
The best result for the world will surely be if both young men manage to live their lives as good citizens from this point on. Venables should be dealt with realistically, as with any other prisoner, not treated as a member of an alien species. And Thompson should be left in peace until there is reason not to.
Well, I guess she's very screwed up.
And the Judge who in his wisdom decided to 'name' them at the end of the trial. Why
There would be no need for all this new identity stuff and security. They would still be monitored, still have parole conditions to adhere to but there wouldn't be a permanant security problem.
I agree with you.
I don't know what she's trying to achieve anymore?
* probably also America.
my understanding of the case was that a decision had to be made by judges when they got to 18 as to whether they transferred to adult prison or went free, the decision was that adult prison could undo the work that had so far been achieved in the secure units they were in and so further progress could be made in the community under supervision. remember they are both on licence for life, that wont change
so far, one of them has been recalled to prison and although on internet child porn offences, im not sure that is similar to the crime originally committed.
As importantly, there would have been none of the media coverage fuelling the fire. And it keeps fuelling it.
I daresay. Who wouldn't be? I just think she's not been helped/advised very well. I don't think she should be skipping around and jumping for joy but I do think she should be enjoying her family and burying the hatred and need for revenge.
I don't suppose her life could ever be 100% happy again - I do think she could be a lot happier than she is though.
She eaten up with hate, I guess this is her way of channeling it.
Name and shame?
I'm out.