James Bulger's Dad Wants Killers' New Identity Taken Away

[taxman]

I think the original sentences were probably on the lenient side because they gave scope for changing and showing remorse and becoming different people. We will never know what or who Thompson has become but we know Venables.

 

He's broken his parole multiple times, a recidivist, a palpable threat, a known drug user. But still seems to be under the "protection" of the probation service, his crimes hushed up, his trips to Liverpool excused.

 

A line should now be drawn. He's had his chances, and no matter what sort of hideous childhood he might have had, it won't wash anymore, that's it. He is an ongoing threat to young children and should be locked up.

[*_ash_*]

The title apostrophe - I think - means both. but the topic is mainly venables.

 

Are they asking for both?

 

I didn't watch the one last night because I had enough after the other one the night or two before.

 

The other ones lawyer said (and obviously knows him) said he thought we'd never see the other one like this - probably meaning he's living a normal life now.

 

-

 

As for the picture thing, I googled imaged it - just to see what it brought up, and it brings up so many men, that anyone could end up lynched for being him (venables)

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2018 at 22:33 ----------

 

On Question Time last night , a chap in the audience said that Venables should now be told in no uncertain terms , that when he finishes this latest sentence he will keep his anonymity BUT if he offends again, then hes on his own

I've not watched it yet, but obviously there is a section on this, and will see tomorrow when I watch it.

 

I tend to think more the next quote here...

 

I think the original sentences were probably on the lenient side because they gave scope for changing and showing remorse and becoming different people. We will never know what or who Thompson has become but we know Venables.

 

He's broken his parole multiple times, a recidivist, a palpable threat, a known drug user. But still seems to be under the "protection" of the probation service, his crimes hushed up, his trips to Liverpool excused.

 

A line should now be drawn. He's had his chances, and no matter what sort of hideous childhood he might have had, it won't wash anymore, that's it. He is an ongoing threat to young children and should be locked up.

 

 

-

 

Either way, the whole thing is and always has been very messy.

[Penistone999]

I think the original sentences were probably on the lenient side because they gave scope for changing and showing remorse and becoming different people. We will never know what or who Thompson has become but we know Venables.

 

He's broken his parole multiple times, a recidivist, a palpable threat, a known drug user. But still seems to be under the "protection" of the probation service, his crimes hushed up, his trips to Liverpool excused.

 

A line should now be drawn. He's had his chances, and no matter what sort of hideous childhood he might have had, it won't wash anymore, that's it. He is an ongoing threat to young children and should be locked up.

 

One of the lawyers on the programme last night said one of the the reasons they were only given 10 years was because any longer would have meant them being transferred to an adult prison , and they would have been at severe risk of harm had that happened.

 

So basically their sentence was 10 years so to protect them from what would lie in store for them in an adult prison at 18 years old.

 

For me, this is wrong on every level .

[*_ash_*]

One of the lawyers on the programme last night said one of the the reasons they were only given 10 years was because any longer would have meant them being transferred to an adult prison , and they would have been at severe risk of harm had that happened.

 

So basically their sentence was 10 years so to protect them from what would lie in store for them in an adult prison at 18 years old.

 

For me, this is wrong on every level .

 

On that programme, there were quite a lot of differing opinions, and topics to discuss, I think.

 

I thought the Norway part was quite bizarre too.

[Penistone999]

On that programme, there were quite a lot of differing opinions, and topics to discuss, I think.

 

I thought the Norway part was quite bizarre too.

 

I agree , it was

[Halibut]

One of the lawyers on the programme last night said one of the the reasons they were only given 10 years was because any longer would have meant them being transferred to an adult prison , and they would have been at severe risk of harm had that happened.

 

So basically their sentence was 10 years so to protect them from what would lie in store for them in an adult prison at 18 years old.

 

For me, this is wrong on every level .

 

Would it be fair to say you would like a system where inmates are permitted to deal out punishment beatings at will, on anyone they see fit?

 

Or perhaps where regular beatings are part of the punishment?

 

Did you get smacked around a lot as a kid and find it arousing perhaps?

[ENG601PM]

I'd much rather see a good citizen come out after two years than a criminal out after ten. That's not going to win any votes though.

 

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" said Tony Blair, before increasing the prison population and producing more criminals than before.

[nikki-red]

But are the photos that are been shared on FB actually him. Last thing we need is a case of mistaken identity and someone getting seriously hurt because a lynch mob sees someone that looks similar to the person in the FB posts.

 

 

Ive seen a link on facebook this morning with the headline stating that 'Venables is now the most wanted man in prison' or something along those lines.

There was the photo of him as a child and one of a grown man.

 

Against my better judgement I clicked the link and read the article, and NOWHERE did it state that the grown man in the photo at the top of the page was actually Ralph Bulger, James' father.

[woggle]

Ive seen a link on facebook this morning with the headline stating that 'Venables is now the most wanted man in prison' or something along those lines.

There was the photo of him as a child and one of a grown man.

 

Against my better judgement I clicked the link and read the article, and NOWHERE did it state that the grown man in the photo at the top of the page was actually Ralph Bulger, James' father.

 

You're right.

In the interview with Denise Fergus, it seemed that Robert Thompson was the main perpetrator, and yet he hasn't been heard of since.

My brother was a prison officer up to a couple of years ago.

He says its easy to work out who's who, and why they're in.

Obviously someone in for 40 months, and he'll be in segregation anyway.

He's in the big boys jail now and his crimes are not going to win him friends.

He could live next door to any of us on release and we wouldn't know.

Edited February 12, 2018 by woggle

[Hopman]

 

As for Venables, whilst I'm not a violent person, I see no reason whatsoever not to re-introduce the death penalty for this thing. I would say vermin, but that would be harsh on vermin. Utter filth, and deserves the rope.

 

The strength of our legal system is that someone can commit a crime and be punished according to the law in force at the time. We may not agree with the decision, but we have to abide by the law.

To bring back the death penalty and hang a murderer could only apply in the case of future murders.

The law lays down specific tariffs for crimes. These are respected by the judiciary. We may not agree with the sentences handed down, but there are set guidelines. To suggest otherwise could send us down a dangerous path.

The original decision, reached in a court of law, was that anonymity should be granted. Whether this is a good idea is immaterial, it's what the law dictated. It was lifetime anonymity, not anonymity for just thirty years.

There is a danger that someone will see a picture circulating on the internet and jump to the conclusion that the picture is of a public enemy figure.

You can send a postcard to Dennis Alan, but you might be in danger of sending it to someone who looks like him.

[NOTE to Mods - Dennis Alan is NOT the new identity of Venables]