Isn't one of the killers a dad now? Im sure I heard that somewhere. That makes my blood boil if thats true. Apparently their girlfriends have no idea who they really are.
Sorry if i sound harsh and my heart goes out to the parents, but it goes out to all the familes of all the kids killed in the world. Jamie bulger isnt the only child to have died.
I agree unfortunately he isn't...he is the most prominent one I know of though and speaking for myself it also makes me think of all the other children over the years that terrible things have happened to.....very sad for all concerned.
Isn't one of the killers a dad now? Im sure I heard that somewhere. That makes my blood boil if thats true. Apparently their girlfriends have no idea who they really are.
That's one of the rumours, Liam....Google has lots of angles as to what became of that two!
There is just no need for this kind of post IMO....
Not only is there no need, this person couldn't have ever been a parent or a carer to a toddler. You can't explain "stranger danger" to a child of James' age at the time (wasn't he 2 or 3?).
Try as you might, you can't always keep an eye on a curious toddler and they slip away so quickly. It has happened to me and it is easy to be getting something off a shelf or a rack of clothes and the wee slips away from you.
Not only is there no need, this person couldn't have ever been a parent or a carer to a toddler. You can't explain "stranger danger" to a child of James' age at the time (wasn't he 2 or 3?).
Try as you might, you can't always keep an eye on a curious toddler and they slip away so quickly. It has happened to me and it is easy to be getting something off a shelf or a rack of clothes and the wee slips away from you.
you destroy your own argument.If you can't explain the danger to them then it is your responsibility to keep an eye on them.
Not only is there no need, this person couldn't have ever been a parent or a carer to a toddler. You can't explain "stranger danger" to a child of James' age at the time (wasn't he 2 or 3?).
Try as you might, you can't always keep an eye on a curious toddler and they slip away so quickly. It has happened to me and it is easy to be getting something off a shelf or a rack of clothes and the wee slips away from you.
Not only that the 'stranger danger' was other children....where does that one figure in the text books.
Not only is there no need, this person couldn't have ever been a parent or a carer to a toddler. You can't explain "stranger danger" to a child of James' age at the time (wasn't he 2 or 3?).
Try as you might, you can't always keep an eye on a curious toddler and they slip away so quickly. It has happened to me and it is easy to be getting something off a shelf or a rack of clothes and the wee slips away from you.
I did...then got told off by 'other superior Mums' for tying my child up...go figure eh! :mad:
Thta's just crazy - at least you recognised that if the child was likely to wander off you should do something to ensure he didn't get into any trouble.
I still can't understand the issue though.
Those children were seen on cctv leading the baby away from the shopping centre.She lost him inside a shop.
Now when i go shopping, if i have any bags containing something important it goes like this - arrive at counter, put bags down, get out wallet, glance at bags, get out money, glance at bags, hand over money wait for change glance at bags.Get change put in wallet glancing at bags -
exactly what this mother would have done.Those glances take a illisecond, if at any point she had have noticed he wasn't there, she could have looked round.
How long was he actually missing to have got right into the shopping centre?
And if i had a child with me i would be looking round for him a lot more than i do with bags.
However i said that doesnt excuse the boys takinghim and killing him.
Thta's just crazy - at least you recognised that if the child was likely to wander off you should do something to ensure he didn't get into any trouble.
I still can't understand the issue though.
Those children were seen on cctv leading the baby away from the shopping centre.She lost him inside a shop.
Now when i go shopping, if i have any bags containing something important it goes like this - arrive at counter, put bags down, get out wallet, glance at bags, get out money, glance at bags, hand over money wait for change glance at bags.Get change put in wallet glancing at bags -
exactly what this mother would have done.Those glances take a illisecond, if at any point she had have noticed he wasn't there, she could have looked round.
How long was he actually missing to have got right into the shopping centre?
And if i had a child with me i would be looking round for him a lot more than i do with bags.
However i said that doesnt excuse the boys takinghim and killing him.
I gather from this post that you don't have children?
A brief run down for you - unlike 'bags' children can walk and move around by themselves, hence it only taking a second for them to be out of sight...
I gather from this post that you don't have children?
A brief run down for you - unlike 'bags' children can walk and move around by themselves, hence it only taking a second for them to be out of sight...
Right, and if you have children then you know this to be true so you watch them.
I am not going to argue it any further.
The whole thing is tragic, the children should never have killed the poor baby, and goodness only knows what kind of upbringing they had to do such a thing, but parents should keep an eye on their children.
Thta's just crazy - at least you recognised that if the child was likely to wander off you should do something to ensure he didn't get into any trouble.
I still can't understand the issue though.
Those children were seen on cctv leading the baby away from the shopping centre.She lost him inside a shop.
Now when i go shopping, if i have any bags containing something important it goes like this - arrive at counter, put bags down, get out wallet, glance at bags, get out money, glance at bags, hand over money wait for change glance at bags.Get change put in wallet glancing at bags -
exactly what this mother would have done.Those glances take a illisecond, if at any point she had have noticed he wasn't there, she could have looked round.
How long was he actually missing to have got right into the shopping centre?
And if i had a child with me i would be looking round for him a lot more than i do with bags.
However i said that doesnt excuse the boys takinghim and killing him.
Oh I wish my kids would behave as well as shopping bags do.
The reality is quite different...however I will use your shopping bags as an example.
You're at the till as you say....you can't find your purse...the Q is very long...you rummage in your handbag...no purse...by now you are sweating and the Q are getting rowdy at the loser who can't find their purse.....you are all sweaty and hassled....you don't care about your bags anymore all you want is that damn purse....you check your pockets all of them inside and out....more huffing and puffing from the Q.......you know you had the purse in the last shop.......you apologise and smile meakly at the Q...the Q ignores you......you check that hand bag again....by now there is a stack of personal items on the til area........ah ha there it is....only you have no cash left....you hand over the card.....you wait to PIN it.....the Q shuffles and huffs some more....finally you are done. You grab said shopping bags and go outside to put the new stuff in one of the bigger bags.....where is the bigger bag.....some oik has nicked it!
This is how these things happen....no-one plans it.....it's not because peeps don't care or take things seriously....they just happen.
I think Jamie managed to get that far inside the mall because Mum and family were still looking for him in the shop.
I used a wrist strap on my son when he was younger, completely prevents them running off! However, I did get comments from one woman one day, who looked at my son and turned to her friend and said "some people treat their kids just like animals, it shouldn't be allowed". I overheard and seriously let rip at how allowing a 2 year old to wander near the busy A6 is not a prospect I favoured and he hated his pushchair, so why endanger him. Her and her friend had to endure me raving at them in public until I got an apology and some old man overhearing applauded when I finished
It is sickening what happened, and whilst I don't agree with them being let out so early, they were children, capable of learning after the fact. Whilst many others don't agree, I detest the hate campaign that is levelled at the two boys. In e eyes of the law, justice was done, it is not up to the general public to wage a hate-war against these people and their families.
I often wondered why the parents of the two boys weren't bought to task in some way?
Perhaps we should think about this in that way that it is consoling that we take notice of the anniversary. It means we haven't forgotten. I mean if we had that would mean that in the meantime several similar or even worse(if that is possible) incidents have happened.
On the other hand, I'm sure the parents of that child know very well that it is an anniversary. Why do the rest of us have to keep on about it? It certainly doesn't make the parents feel any better.
I dread to think of the future anniversaries of Maddie's disappearance.
Read the case. Jamie slipped from his mum's grasp and ran off, disappearing in a brief second. Which is why we dont blame her for his death, as it can happep to anyone.
Compare that with you-know-who, who left 3 children unattended in an apartment 500 yards away, and clearly lied about how visible the apartment was...
Read the case. Jamie slipped from his mum's grasp and ran off, disappearing in a brief second. Which is why we dont blame her for his death, as it can happep to anyone.
Compare that with you-know-who, who left 3 children unattended in an apartment 500 yards away, and clearly lied about how visible the apartment was...
you misunderstand me.I am not blaming her for his death at all.She wasnt to know that these two lads were loooking for a baby to torture.I assume that she thought that the worst that could happen would be that he would get lost in the shopping centre and they would have to put out a call for someone to bring him to security.
But time after time, young children get run over, fall into ponds, etc etc, i do not understand why parents dont keep an eye on their children, that's all.
The torture and murder of the Brady-Hindley victims still utterly chills the blood over 40 years after the fact. The tapes for example are still so horrible that they will never be released to the public. The brutality of Jack the Ripper still appalls us.
Bulger's murder and its brutality will still be horrible to our great-great grandchildren and their successive progeny.
Some crimes have no time limit on their horrificness.
Right, and if you have children then you know this to be true so you watch them.
I am not going to argue it any further.
The whole thing is tragic, the children should never have killed the poor baby, and goodness only knows what kind of upbringing they had to do such a thing, but parents should keep an eye on their children.
A kid suddenly wondering off can happen to any parent, all it takes is for one moment of distraction and gone.
I've seen it happen a few times, parent with child next to them, even holding onto them then something happens, for instance whilst making purchase theres a problem with credit card, person panics starts looking for other card and getting distracted, and kid wanders off.
you misunderstand me.I am not blaming her for his death at all.She wasnt to know that these two lads were loooking for a baby to torture.I assume that she thought that the worst that could happen would be that he would get lost in the shopping centre and they would have to put out a call for someone to bring him to security.
But time after time, young children get run over, fall into ponds, etc etc, i do not understand why parents dont keep an eye on their children, that's all.
...because being a parent is 24/7 365 days a year and sometimes we get tired, so perhaps don't pay attention quite as much as we would like to.
you destroy your own argument.If you can't explain the danger to them then it is your responsibility to keep an eye on them.
:rolleyes: I did not destroy my own argument. You don't have kids, you don't get it. It is hard to explain anything to a 2 year old. I have had one, I know.
I did for a while, but I'd forget to take them out, especially if it was a short trip to the shops to get a couple of things. I don't really like using them and they can get out of those things as well. The point is James' granny took her eye off him for a minute and he was abducted by 2 kids. The most vigilant parent in the world couldn't have forseen that.
Comments
I agree unfortunately he isn't...he is the most prominent one I know of though and speaking for myself it also makes me think of all the other children over the years that terrible things have happened to.....very sad for all concerned.
His story makes me remember the many as well.
*** Shakes head ***
There is just no need for this kind of post IMO....
I agree. :mad:
nobody should look after their own children.Let them get run over etc.
By your logic.
That's one of the rumours, Liam....Google has lots of angles as to what became of that two!
That's attention seeking at its plain worst. Seriously. do you have a brain???
Not only is there no need, this person couldn't have ever been a parent or a carer to a toddler. You can't explain "stranger danger" to a child of James' age at the time (wasn't he 2 or 3?).
Try as you might, you can't always keep an eye on a curious toddler and they slip away so quickly. It has happened to me and it is easy to be getting something off a shelf or a rack of clothes and the wee slips away from you.
you destroy your own argument.If you can't explain the danger to them then it is your responsibility to keep an eye on them.
Not only that the 'stranger danger' was other children....where does that one figure in the text books.
Don't parents use reigns any more?
I did...then got told off by 'other superior Mums' for tying my child up...go figure eh! :mad:
James didn't get run over - he was abducted by two 10 year old boys and subjected to a horrific ordeal before they murdered him.
Really - there is no need for your comments... As every parent will tell you all it takes is a split second ....
Thta's just crazy - at least you recognised that if the child was likely to wander off you should do something to ensure he didn't get into any trouble.
I still can't understand the issue though.
Those children were seen on cctv leading the baby away from the shopping centre.She lost him inside a shop.
Now when i go shopping, if i have any bags containing something important it goes like this - arrive at counter, put bags down, get out wallet, glance at bags, get out money, glance at bags, hand over money wait for change glance at bags.Get change put in wallet glancing at bags -
exactly what this mother would have done.Those glances take a illisecond, if at any point she had have noticed he wasn't there, she could have looked round.
How long was he actually missing to have got right into the shopping centre?
And if i had a child with me i would be looking round for him a lot more than i do with bags.
However i said that doesnt excuse the boys takinghim and killing him.
I gather from this post that you don't have children?
A brief run down for you - unlike 'bags' children can walk and move around by themselves, hence it only taking a second for them to be out of sight...
Right, and if you have children then you know this to be true so you watch them.
I am not going to argue it any further.
The whole thing is tragic, the children should never have killed the poor baby, and goodness only knows what kind of upbringing they had to do such a thing, but parents should keep an eye on their children.
Oh I wish my kids would behave as well as shopping bags do.
The reality is quite different...however I will use your shopping bags as an example.
You're at the till as you say....you can't find your purse...the Q is very long...you rummage in your handbag...no purse...by now you are sweating and the Q are getting rowdy at the loser who can't find their purse.....you are all sweaty and hassled....you don't care about your bags anymore all you want is that damn purse....you check your pockets all of them inside and out....more huffing and puffing from the Q.......you know you had the purse in the last shop.......you apologise and smile meakly at the Q...the Q ignores you......you check that hand bag again....by now there is a stack of personal items on the til area........ah ha there it is....only you have no cash left....you hand over the card.....you wait to PIN it.....the Q shuffles and huffs some more....finally you are done. You grab said shopping bags and go outside to put the new stuff in one of the bigger bags.....where is the bigger bag.....some oik has nicked it!
This is how these things happen....no-one plans it.....it's not because peeps don't care or take things seriously....they just happen.
I think Jamie managed to get that far inside the mall because Mum and family were still looking for him in the shop.
It is sickening what happened, and whilst I don't agree with them being let out so early, they were children, capable of learning after the fact. Whilst many others don't agree, I detest the hate campaign that is levelled at the two boys. In e eyes of the law, justice was done, it is not up to the general public to wage a hate-war against these people and their families.
I often wondered why the parents of the two boys weren't bought to task in some way?
On the other hand, I'm sure the parents of that child know very well that it is an anniversary. Why do the rest of us have to keep on about it? It certainly doesn't make the parents feel any better.
I dread to think of the future anniversaries of Maddie's disappearance.
Read the case. Jamie slipped from his mum's grasp and ran off, disappearing in a brief second. Which is why we dont blame her for his death, as it can happep to anyone.
Compare that with you-know-who, who left 3 children unattended in an apartment 500 yards away, and clearly lied about how visible the apartment was...
you misunderstand me.I am not blaming her for his death at all.She wasnt to know that these two lads were loooking for a baby to torture.I assume that she thought that the worst that could happen would be that he would get lost in the shopping centre and they would have to put out a call for someone to bring him to security.
But time after time, young children get run over, fall into ponds, etc etc, i do not understand why parents dont keep an eye on their children, that's all.
The torture and murder of the Brady-Hindley victims still utterly chills the blood over 40 years after the fact. The tapes for example are still so horrible that they will never be released to the public. The brutality of Jack the Ripper still appalls us.
Bulger's murder and its brutality will still be horrible to our great-great grandchildren and their successive progeny.
Some crimes have no time limit on their horrificness.
A kid suddenly wondering off can happen to any parent, all it takes is for one moment of distraction and gone.
I've seen it happen a few times, parent with child next to them, even holding onto them then something happens, for instance whilst making purchase theres a problem with credit card, person panics starts looking for other card and getting distracted, and kid wanders off.
...because being a parent is 24/7 365 days a year and sometimes we get tired, so perhaps don't pay attention quite as much as we would like to.
I did for a while, but I'd forget to take them out, especially if it was a short trip to the shops to get a couple of things. I don't really like using them and they can get out of those things as well. The point is James' granny took her eye off him for a minute and he was abducted by 2 kids. The most vigilant parent in the world couldn't have forseen that.