The dreaded thread, annonimity or not?

[Wils]

As would we all.   

But do we have the right?

[Mab y Mynydd]

Anonymity for Venables and Thompson is a side issue as far as I'm concerned.  As two boys aged ten years, they abducted, beat and kicked without mercy a small child named James Bulger.  They then sought to disguise their crime by placing his body on a railway line.  That is not within the range of any normal human behaviour of a ten year old.  Their perverted actions should have indicated that they were not suitable for release into the wider community ever.  Venables and Thompson should have been kept in secure accommodation with humane treatment for the rest of their lives.

[TreFFS]

...  Their perverted actions should have indicated that they were not suitable for release into the wider community ever.  Venables and Thompson should have been kept in secure accommodation with humane treatment for the rest of their lives.

Are you suggesting that reform (one reason that is given for imprisonment) is not possible?

Or are you saying that their actions were so horrendous that they stay imprisoned for ever?

[Mab y Mynydd]

Are you suggesting that reform (one reason that is given for imprisonment) is not possible?
It is not one reason given for imprisonment.  Imprisonment is a punishment in itself.  Rehabilitation of prisoners is a target of the authorities who imprison them.  Its success is very limited.

Or are you saying that their actions were so horrendous that they stay imprisoned for ever?

I'm not sure how much more explicit I can be but my statement that, "Venables and Thompson should have been kept in secure accommodation with humane treatment for the rest of their lives." is self-explanatory.

[Ian_Helen]

Might just be gossip, but heard thompson worked at Valley until they clicked and er told him so, now in Australia

[Ian_Helen]

We should also remember that these 2 are not just guilty of a crime, they are also killers and murderers.

[Jesus Wept]

Might just be gossip, but heard thompson worked at Valley until they clicked and er told him so, now in Australia

Doubt it though but.   Think about it.  If you needed to disappear where would be the best place to hide?  In a small community where everyone knows everyone and a stranger sticks out like a three-legged goat?  Or in a faceless grey city where people are more inclined to mind their own business and being a stranger is normal?  Seems to me that both if them will have been resettled where they would have attracted the least attention - in North West England or Soth Yorkshire,  in a well populted area - Greater Manchester, Sheffield, Doncaster, Bradford

Anyway,  in that Sunday Mail peice the Social Worker claims he bumped into Thompson purely by mistake a couple of years ago in "a northern city" where he was now living.  See if you can get a copy off one of your friends - well worth a read.

[Che Guevaras Flip Flops]

Some very good points and equally good questions have been raised in this thread.   Personally - and I know this will go down like a lead balloon - I believe everything possible must be done to protect the new identity of Venables for several reasons.    

As a civilized society we have a duty to protect him no matter what he has done.   You cannot turn on and off being civilised just to suit yourself at any given moment that you feel like.  Just because he is a murderer does not make his murder - should it ever happen - more acceptable because of what he has done.   No matter what happens with these fresh allegations,  he will eventually be released again - in either within a couple of weeks should they be groundless,  or after a custodial sentence should he be tried.

Rehabilitation is the key.   Rehabilitation is the benchmark of our judicial system and the benchmark of a tolerant and socially just society.  Unfortunately, it is failing.   More than 50% of offenders who receive a custodial sentence of 12 months or less reoffend within a year of release.   Why?    

In my time in the Army I guarded prisons during two disputes.   Most of the prisoners I came into contact with should never have been imprisoned in the first place - they had ended up there because of the 'snowball' effect.  They had committed an offence, been fined, not kept up with the payments, been put in probation,  not kept regular attendance, end up in jail.    Very quickly it was also apparent that a huge number of prisoners have literacy and numeracy problems that prevent them gaining gainful worthwhile employment.  These were not addressed and as a result whne they were released not only could they still not read and write but now they had a criminal record and as a result were even more unemployable and more likely to revert back to crime.

Back to topic.    I have tried to find the article to Which JW refers that was in the MoS.  I read it as well and in the case of Thompson (to whom it is concerned with)  it's deeply worrying if true.      i would link it in but I cannot unearth it on their website.

On the Venables front,  there are some excellent articles in today's Times which can be seen here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7056026.ece    and a copy of his psychiatric report can be seen here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7056013.ece

I see also the rumour about one of them having lived in Valley after release.  I heard it was more Llanfechell way but like JW I doubt it very much.  Safest place to hide is in a crowd.

[Wils]

Moral dilemma question no1:

If you had to EITHER punish a sex offender OR successfully cure them (by which I don't mean hang them or castrate them but change their mindset) what would you do?

[Che Guevaras Flip Flops]

Moral dilemma question no1:

If you had to EITHER punish a sex offender OR successfully cure them (by which I don't mean hang them or castrate them but change their mindset) what would you do?

It's not a moarl dilemma.  Punish means they will be uncured and still a threat.      Cure means they go unpunished but are no longer a threat.

The real answer is both but with the emphasis on cure.  From day one of a prisoner's incarceration the emphaisis must always be built around getting them ready for their eventual release otherwise it's pointless and you will be wilingly with aforethought releasing a real threat back into society. Not a potential one - a real one.

That said,  if it was just one or just the other it would have to be cure.

[Wils]

Moral dilemma question no1:

If you had to EITHER punish a sex offender OR successfully cure them (by which I don't mean hang them or castrate them but change their mindset) what would you do?

It's not a moarl dilemma.  Punish means they will be uncured and still a threat.      Cure means they go unpunished but are no longer a threat.

And therefore that question IS a moral dilemma.  Obviously it isn't a real world scenario but it helps to clarify attitudes.  I'd personally prefer to see them all cured, as you would.

[Carnedyr]

Many of you are going to dislike my way of thinking...

1 Justice = Life for a Life > execution/life imprisonment.
2 Punishment = They didn't know what they were doing because they were too young > can't be punished.
3 Rehab = How can you rehabilitate the life they took away?

On a side issue that I think is strongly related, how can our society help prevent problems caused when parents don't parent?

[Delilah]

Venables obviously wasn't rehabilitated then, and I agree with Carny, life for a life, and I sometimes wish we weren't such a tolerant society

[Che Guevaras Flip Flops]

A life for a life?   

I sincerely hope neither of you considers yourselves to be in any way shape or form socialist and that neither of you is or was a member of a Trades Union.

[Mab y Mynydd]

I don't quite follow the logic of your post, Che.  Are you prepared to elaborate?

[Che Guevaras Flip Flops]

because capital punishment (and corporal punishmnet) go against the core beliefs of both within the UK.

[Homer]

So that's where my Flip Flops went !    



I think that as 10 year olds they should have been given another chance to rehabilitate and the right decision was made (although what they did was sick and they have some serious issues going on) but with the new thing he is alleged to have done I dont think he should be protected any longer and have his I.D. kept secret etc.    and if someone gets hold of him then good the world will be a better place without scum like him in it.

[Carnedyr]

I don't quite follow the logic of your post, Che.  Are you prepared to elaborate?

yea please Che, I have belonged to a trade union in the past due to wanting job protection in times of trouble but many politicians (left or right) to me have small ideals about justice, honesty, family values and trust.

because capital punishment (and corporal punishmnet) go against the core beliefs of both within the UK.

I bet they promote working parents and latch key kids though?

[Mab y Mynydd]

because capital punishment (and corporal punishmnet) go against the core beliefs of both within the UK.

I'm not sure that your assertion has universal approval amongst Socialists.  Socialism depends on and demands that every member of society receives justice but the price they pay is the act of showing justice to others.  Clearly Venables and Thompson do not come up to that expectation.

[Delilah]

I think they should be tortured in the same way they did to James Bulger!

[Che Guevaras Flip Flops]

Mab,  find me a socialist party or trades union within the UK that is even neutral about capital punishment.  You won't.  They are all outspokenly 'anti' as a matter of policy and quite rightly so.

The trades union movement is at the forefront in condemning other countries for still carrying out this barbaric practice and again quite rightly so.

[TreFFS]

Many of you are going to dislike my way of thinking...

Oh I don't know. Disagree maybe -- but that's different.  

1 Justice = Life for a Life > execution/life imprisonment.

I'm always unhappy using the word "justice". It means so many different things to different people that it only ends up clouding the isssues.
I think the questio are (or should be): What do we do in a situation such as this. And (more important -- what do we do to prevent them happening?

2 Punishment = They didn't know what they were doing because they were too young > can't be punished.
 

Both Thompson and Venables seem to to have had such a chaotic upbringing that it is unlikely that they would have beeen able to develop the skills of social responsibility the majoority of us consider normal.

Legally they were too young to be dealt with in the normal way by the law (that is punishment by long terms of imprisonment.)

3 Rehab = How can you rehabilitate the life they took away?
 

You can't. All you can do is ensure that the perpetrators don't (or are unlikely) to do it again. Absent the death penalty (for ten year olds??) then rehabilitation seems the only option.

On a side issue that I think is strongly related, how can our society help prevent problems caused when parents don't parent?

Possibly by all of us taking responsibility for all children.

[Carnedyr]

Think carefully about the purposes of trades unions, socialist parties, conservative parties, labour parties etc and decide whether they should define justice? Then should they decide what is evil, truth, untruth, a lie, honesty, how we live, what we think?

We don't need these things defined for us as grown responsible adults.

We all know what justice means, so let's do it.

Let them raise taxes instead to pay for our countries expenses, that's their job.

[Wils]

I think they should be tortured in the same way they did to James Bulger!

So would you have tortured two ten year old children to death?  I don't think so.

I find it hard to believe in "evil" - there is always cause for such behaviour, be it nature or nurture.   I don't think such punishment would have prevented this death.