James Bulger murderer Jon Venables returned to prison

epgc3fyqirnbsx

They were dirty rotten bastard kids, but they were kids all the same
It wouldn't be right to lock up a kid for the rest of his natural life for a murder, even a sick one, because they are a blank canvas at that stage. I'm assuming that before being let out they had to undergo severe psychological testing, the state is at an obligation to let them go after time has been served and they don't pose a threat.
Dunno what he did to get sent back but I have no doubt that he deserved it. But kids are kids, they had to get out some time

wes

Dudess wrote: »

Why not? Maybe they have?

You don't know at well whether that's true or not.

While I am sympathetic to a lot of what you say, one of them is going back to prison. So it looks like in one case it didn't take.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Dudess wrote: »

They were 10 then, they're in the second half of their 20s now - who HASN'T changed massively during those years?

I believe our past helps make us into the people we are today.

Their past is evil, and evil begets evil.

As a parent of two children I don't believe child killers should be given a second chance - even child child killers.

minidazzler

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

I've never, ever disagreed with you & would say your one of the most level headed people I know from boards.ie.

But, your wrong.

The case stir's so much emotion in me, I remember very clearly lying on my bed talking to my father when this broke on the news.

At the time there was a lot of child kidnapping in the UK (mainly England) and the police were gaining some success breaking up Pedo-rings.

When I seen the CCTV footage of the abduction I remember saying to my father "if they're going to kill him I hope its soon and quick for the childs sake".

Personally I feel these two are evil bastards that should never smell freedom again.

See, I would totally agree with you except for the fact he was extremely young when he did it.

I don't hold much faith in the rehabilitation of people in prisons, but the fact he was so young, I do think he could totally change his personality. Puberty is basically a huge shuffle in personality. I know I completely changed during it.

I don't even nearly condone what he did, I believe that what he did was evil and absolutely unforgivable.

But I also believe that given his age, he could change. I do think he could have been rehabilitated. I don't know if he was, but I do think he could have been.

All this is from virtue of his age.

If it had been a grown man, or older boy I would be one of the people calling for his immense pain, but he was 10 years old.

These kids were fcuked up, whether by nature or nurture I don't know. I don't believe in second chances usually in these situations, but this was not a usual situation, premeditated though it was, I think that after they grew up and were assessed thoroughly being freed was the only real thing that could be done.

Most people would not agree with me, I know that, and I don't expect them too. But my view is him being freed wasn't a bad idea as long as he was thoroughly and properly assessed for re-emergence into society.

FlawedGenius

Dudess wrote: »

Why not? Maybe they have?

You don't know at well whether that's true or not.

They were 10 then, they're in the second half of their 20s now - who HASN'T changed massively during those years? How do you know they're not overwhelmed with remorse every second of the day? Not for getting caught but simply for what they did to that little boy?
I agree there's also a chance they're not, but unless you're a child psychiatrist you can't tell... It's easy to believe they're evil children who grew into evil monsters - if only things were that straightforward though...

Whether they have changed or not, they should still have spent the rest of their lives in prison. Being evil is something your born with I think, its incurable, like being gay. I havent heard of much murderers or serial killers who ever showed any remorse. Any 10 year old who enjoys torturing a toddler is seriously fcuked up and its not something theyl grow out of like robbing sweets in a shop. Im not a child pschiatrist but Id say theyd say the same thing.

hooradiation

Now, i could apply reason and common sense to this or i could get on the knuckleheaded bandwagon an..RABBLERABBLERABBLE MURDER THEM IN A HORRIBLE FASHION...THAT'LL SHOW THEM WHO'S AN UNSTABLE VIOLENT MONSTER!

god this is fun!

Bodhisopha

wes wrote: »

While I am sympathetic to a lot of what you say, one of them is going back to prison. So it looks like in one case it didn't take.

Not all prisoners are evil.

It's hardly surprising someone who has been jailed from the age of 10 is going back to prison. Doesn't mean they're evil and feel no remorse.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

I believe our past helps make us into the people we are today.

Their past is evil, and evil begets evil.

As a parent of two children I don't believe child killers should be given a second chance - even child child killers.

Perhaps my opinion may change when and if I have kids but I just cannot believe otherwise than at that young age, there should be special considerations

No doubt they knew what they were doing was very very wrong and as such should have been punished in a severe manner, but to come about with that way of thinking to commit the crime in the first place??
If they were severely psychotic they would have spent their time in institutions and I have absolutely no doubt that they would have seen the foremost 'mind experts' in the UK
But I really think they were very stupid and brought up very recklessly, but at that young age, that there was time to save them. As Dudess said how do we know they aren't riddled with guilt for what they did to that poor boy.

I'm relying on the intelligence of the relevant authorities here (and lets not get flippant about that) but if they weren't genuinely remorseful and rehabilitated I don't think they would be released.

There's good and bad in everyone, you just need to have your good side nurtured from an early age

Dudess

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

I believe our past helps make us into the people we are today.

... which would include being a remorse-filled person spending day in, day out trying to atone.

GerCPM wrote: »

Whether they have changed or not, they should still have spent the rest of their lives in prison. Being evil is something your born with I think, its incurable, like being gay. I havent heard of much murderers or serial killers who ever showed any remorse. Any 10 year old who enjoys torturing a toddler is seriously fcuked up and its not something theyl grow out of like robbing sweets in a shop. Im not a child pschiatrist but Id say theyd say the same thing.

Much of that is just pure speculation...

Of course they could still be despicable ****ers, but there's a chance they AREN'T. Just because we want them to be, because it makes things more straightforward, doesn't mean it's true.

brendansmith

I have never killed a child, the thought has never crossed my mind.
I have never even killed a child in the heat of a moment or by accident. I dont think alot of people have killed a child.

However these two young boys schemed and planned to take a child and kill him and at no point on that afternoon thought 'Christ, what are we doing? Lets stop!' They inserted batteries into him and threw bricks at his head and upon seeing blood continued to throw bricks at poor Jamies head until he was dead. They then left him there and went about their business.

Those two boys may have been 10 years old but I think that makes to worst than if they were middle-aged with warped concepts having matured over the decades. Those two murderers should not be allowed go unsupervised ever. If they are capable of that at 10 years old, who knows what else they are capable of at this stage.

lugha

Here's something from one of the media reports.

'There is a worldwide injunction in place that prohibits any reporting including reporting on the internet, that could identify him or his location.'

How does that work? How does a domestic court in one country have the authority to restrict what any interweber, anywhere in the world wide world might or might not upload?

Eoin

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This guy was given new identity after release in 2001.

Looks like he has been naughty again and broke some of his T&C, one of his conditions was that he would not contact or attempt to contact his other partner in crime. His new identity is now fcuked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/8546528.stm

The news report (that you linked to) said that the nature of the breach of the terms and conditions is not going to be released. So why did you include the sentence I have put in bold?

FlawedGenius

Dudess wrote: »

... which would include being a remorse-filled person spending day in, day out trying to atone.

Much of that is just pure speculation...

Of course they could still be despicable ****ers, but there's a chance they AREN'T. Just because we want them to be, because it makes things more straightforward, doesn't mean it's true.

Yeah I know should of put an IMO in. Its in my opinion. Ive watched programmes on serial killers and people who have tortured people for there thrills and it showed in all these people that they showed no remorse and werent sorry, the policer officer even said in that documentary that they showed no remorse, ur right they may now but doubt it. Man slaughter and murders over a fight with someone or whatever is different. Torturing and killing a child for no reason shows evel that cant be cured IMO.

aDeener

hooradiation wrote: »

Now, i could apply reason and common sense to this or i could get on the knuckleheaded bandwagon an..RABBLERABBLERABBLE MURDER THEM IN A HORRIBLE FASHION...THAT'LL SHOW THEM WHO'S AN UNSTABLE VIOLENT MONSTER!

god this is fun!

the poor fella needed more rehabilitation, its a proven method to make former criminals turn into law abiding citizens

Doc

One thing I will say about this is that it’s obvious that they have been tracked and watched since their release and that at least the police in this case seam to be doing their jobs.

I remember when this awful crime happened and to this day it remains one of the most horrible crimes I can think of not just because an innocent child lost his life but because the people who took it so viciously where so young themselves.

I would love to know exactly what he had done as it could have been something as simple as going back to Liverpool without permission though I wouldn’t think that it was only that.

I don’t think their years in prison would have made them any less evil.

shampoosuicide

why do people always suggest it was the parents' fault in crimes like this? bit unfair. maybe the kids were just born with a badness in them. maybe they just went loopy. stranger things have happened.

i doubt their parents tied them to a chair, held their eyelids open, kept whipping them in the face with a chain and forced them to watch violent images 12 hours a day

'i blame the parents.......'

themont85

shampoosuicide wrote: »

why do people always suggest it was the parents' fault in crimes like this? bit unfair. maybe the kids were just born with a badness in them. maybe they just went loopy. stranger things have happened.

i doubt their parents tied them to a chair, held their eyelids open, kept whipping them in the face with a chain and forced them to watch violent images 12 hours a day

'i blame the parents.......'

The Thompson kid was from a broken home. His dad had left the home when he was 6 and his mother drank a lot. He was bullied by his older siblings.

Not that it is an excuse. But certainly that had to be a factor.

The other kid was from a broken home too but was far more irrational with behaviour.

Todd Gack

themont85 wrote: »

The Thompson kid was from a broken home. His dad had left the home when he was 6 and his mother drank a lot. He was bullied by his older siblings.

Not that it is an excuse. But certainly that had to be a factor.

The other kid was from a broken home too but was far more irrational with behaviour.

Thompson was also allegedly sexually abused by one of his older brothers and physically beaten by them as well as by his mother with belts and sticks. He was probably never going to turn out well. While an a truly abhorrent crime they were just 10 years old, obviously no excuse but it's certainly not the same as if two grown men committed the same crime.

Run_to_da_hills

eoin wrote: »

The news report (that you linked to) said that the nature of the breach of the terms and conditions is not going to be released. So why did you include the sentence I have put in bold?

That was just one of the T&C's mentioned at the time of their releases. It also prohibits him from entering the County of Merseyside. We wont know the exact truth until the police release a press report and at that he will have 28 days to appeal it.

http://www.clickliverpool.com/news/national-news/128229-james-bulger-killer-jon-venables-in-prison-over-parole-breach.html

Doop

Todd Gack wrote: »

Thompson was also allegedly sexually abused by one of his older brothers and physically beaten by them as well as by his mother with belts and sticks. He was probably never going to turn out well. While an a truly abhorrent crime they were just 10 years old, obviously no excuse but it's certainly not the same as if two grown men committed the same crime.

+1

This is the pont I wanted to make... while yes the crime is disgusting and very disturbing.. there is a reason kids turn out like this... and I dont believe these kids would of turned out to commit such crimes regardless.

Its unnatural for kids to feel a complete lack of compasion as these did, whilc it doesnt excuse what they did, but I think its fair to question the upbringing they had... which began this awful chain of events

aDeener

themont85 wrote: »

The Thompson kid was from a broken home. His dad had left the home when he was 6 and his mother drank a lot. He was bullied by his older siblings.

Not that it is an excuse. But certainly that had to be a factor.

The other kid was from a broken home too but was far more irrational with behaviour.

circumstances such as those are in no way unusual

m@cc@

shampoosuicide wrote: »

maybe the kids were just born with a badness in them.

Ah c'mon, next you'll start banging on about original sin. Kids are not born with badness in them. They can be susceptible to it but it is definitely something which is instilled in them according to their environment.

shampoosuicide

m@cc@ wrote: »

Ah c'mon, next you'll start banging on about original sin. Kids are not born with badness in them. They can be susceptible to it but it is definitely something which is instilled in them according to their environment.

don't be so naive. it's widely acknowledged that paedophiles, for example, are born with that tendency. the nurturing argument i find very simplistic, especially when you consider that certain people have waded through miles and miles of **** and still retain a sense of morality and decency.

brendansmith

Jesus in the original posts link, that pic makes Venables look so ratlike

m@cc@

shampoosuicide wrote: »

don't be so naive. it's widely acknowledged that paedophiles, for example, are born with that tendency. the nurturing argument i find very simplistic, especially when you consider that certain people have waded through miles and miles of **** and still retain a sense of morality and decency.

Can you tell me what the vast difference between susceptible and tendency is because I cannot see it? I find the 'born bad' argument simplistic as it implies that bad people are born bad and cannot be corrected. Human psychology is far too complex to suggest that people are pre-determined to be bad.

Furthermore, there is also substantial evidence with regards to paedophiles that they were in fact abused as children themselves as opposed to being born that way.

brendansmith wrote: »

Jesus in the original posts link, that pic makes Venables look so ratlike

If you had to pic out a pic of an evil kid from 1000 photos, his would be the one you'd choose.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

m@cc@ wrote: »

If you had to pic out a pic of an evil kid from 1000 photos, his would be the one you'd choose.

My eyebrows meet in the middle and I'm told I look very angry, even when I'm happy.
Does this mean I'm a serial killer

ffs

m@cc@

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

My eyebrows meet in the middle and I'm told I look very angry, even when I'm happy.
Does this mean I'm a serial killer

ffs

Did I even hint anything remotely like that? He just killed the one child as far as I'm aware as well.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

m@cc@ wrote: »

Did I even hint anything remotely like that? He just killed the one child as far as I'm aware as well.

I respect your posts a lot but you can't pick a killer from a photo. I actually listened to a lecture from the lawyer who represented the other boy and he said that when he looked at rhat boy that he gave him a look of 'pure evil'.

Which may qualify your claim but it was in his intertest to put it on the other lad and they were school photos. I wouldn't pay them any mind.

i don't believe in 'evil' but I believe in psychological states and I just cannot believe that in a case that was as high profile as this, that if those boys were so criminaly insane to be beyond redemtion that they would be let out.

It's horrific what human nature is capable of, war teaches all of us that, we've seen ethnic cleansings how many times this century.
And we are rightly horrified as it is obviously wrong, but perhaps this value of life had never been instilled into these boys, sometimes we sont even see it instilled into nations

Obviously what they did was hideous, they must have hjad serious head problems, but sometimes so does society. If you can forgive societies then you should be able to forgive two 10 year olds imo

m@cc@

I wasn't implying anything as deep as that. It was a light-hearted post saying if you had to pick an evil-looking child, he'd be the one you'd pick.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

m@cc@ wrote: »

I wasn't implying anything as deep as that, I was just saying if you had to pick an evil-looking child, he'd be the one you'd pick.

Right, fair enough I was probably reading too much into it, apologies

brendansmith

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

My eyebrows meet in the middle and I'm told I look very angry, even when I'm happy.
Does this mean I'm a serial killer

ffs

m@cc@ wrote: »

Did I even hint anything remotely like that? He just killed the one child as far as I'm aware as well.

You pair are killing this thread!

epgc3fyqirnbsx

brendansmith wrote: »

You pair are killing this thread!

build a bridge dude, after hours is pub talk...

m@cc@

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

Right, fair enough I was probably reading too much into it, apologies

I would never imply that you can pick a murderer out just by looking at them. I make the same argument that you can't pick out an Islamic terrorist just because they were a turban. If only life was that simple. The fact is when somebody murders someone and it's on the news. It amuses me to hear people say 'he was such a good boy' or 'I always knew they were trouble'. You can't predict things like this, not successfully anyway. There are signs but nothing definitive.

And that is the scary thing about the human psyche. You could be best friends with a bloke for 20 years and then one day he could turn round and shoot his wife dead. You wouldn't see it coming.

brendansmith

Landon Old Pigeon wrote: »

build a bridge dude, after hours is pub talk...

Shuurup!

Red_Marauder

The breach could be to do with anything. One of the conditions were that he stay out of the county of Merseyside for life for goodness sake. We don't know all of the conditions imposed on the guilty parties and therefore for all we know this could be a very minor slap on the wrist over the guy not having both headlights.

I dunno, these kids were ten. They have already paid a price greater than most murderers do in my opinion - let them get on with their lives.

Jesus Wept

Dudess wrote: »

Wasn't Venables deemed the "Hindley" to Thompson's "Brady"?

Can you explain further?

GerCPM wrote: »

Whether they have changed or not, they should still have spent the rest of their lives in prison. Being evil is something your born with I think, its incurable, like being gay. I havent heard of much murderers or serial killers who ever showed any remorse. Any 10 year old who enjoys torturing a toddler is seriously fcuked up and its not something theyl grow out of like robbing sweets in a shop. Im not a child pschiatrist but Id say theyd say the same thing.

I'm shocked tbh.

sam34

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This guy was given new identity after release in 2001.

Looks like he has been naughty again and broke some of his T&C, one of his conditions was that he would not contact or attempt to contact his other partner in crime. His new identity is now fcuked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/8546528.stm

eoin wrote: »

The news report (that you linked to) said that the nature of the breach of the terms and conditions is not going to be released. So why did you include the sentence I have put in bold?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

That was just one of the T&C's mentioned at the time of their releases. It also prohibits him from entering the County of Merseyside. We wont know the exact truth until the police release a press report and at that he will have 28 days to appeal it.

we all know that was one of the t&c's.

but what eoin asked is why did you highlight that particular one, when there is nothing to suggest that's the one he broke?

why did you not say "looks like he has been naughty again...one of teh conditions was that he wouldnt enter merseyside"??

insinuating that he tried to contact thompson is just unfounded sensationalist scare-mongering.

robinph

m@cc@ wrote: »

... I make the same argument that you can't pick out an Islamic terrorist just because they were a turban...

A muslim wearing a turban would single them out for further questioning.

Nodin

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

(...............)

Personally I feel these two are evil bastards that should never smell freedom again.

He was 10.

robinph

Nodin wrote: »

He was 10.

...and they have both now spent far more time being brought up by the state rather than their parents. The state is clearly incapable of raising people to be good citizens.

Nodin

robinph wrote: »

...and they have both now spent far more time being brought up by the state rather than their parents. The state is clearly incapable of raising people to be good citizens.

I was unaware that "raising people" was best conducted in a young offenders institute.

robinph

Nodin wrote: »

I was unaware that "raising people" was best conducted in a young offenders institute.

Exactly.

wobblyknees

sam34 wrote: »

we all know that was one of the t&c's.

but what eoin asked is why did you highlight that particular one, when there is nothing to suggest that's the one he broke?

why did you not say "looks like he has been naughty again...one of teh conditions was that he wouldnt enter merseyside"??

insinuating that he tried to contact thompson is just unfounded sensationalist scare-mongering.

Maybe it's because he, like everyone else, is guessing at why Venables has been returned to prison? When you consider that Bulgers mother made attempts to contact one or both of the killers, it's actually a logical suggestion.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Nodin wrote: »

He was 10.

And the baby he murdered was only two.

Its often found that serial killers were the people who tortured spider's and other helpless creatures when they were children, progressing into human's when they entered adulthood.

These two evil bastards just cut right to the chase and murdered a baby.

And I know you'd argue that white is white, but a ten year old know's damned well that torturing and murdering a toddler is wrong.

Personally I'm glad this creep is back where he belongs, rumour has it his partner in crime is living in Ireland where he's not subject to the term's & conditions of his release!.

hooradiation

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

Personally I'm glad this creep is back where he belongs, rumour has it his partner in crime is living in Ireland where he's not subject to the term's & conditions of his release!.

You sound positivity ecstatic at that concept. Should i even bother to ask why?

Dublin_Gunner

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

And the baby he murdered was only two.

Its often found that serial killers were the people who tortured spider's and other helpless creatures when they were children, progressing into human's when they entered adulthood.

These two evil bastards just cut right to the chase and murdered a baby.

And I know you'd argue that white is white, but a ten year old know's damned well that torturing and murdering a toddler is wrong.

Personally I'm glad this creep is back where he belongs, rumour has it his partner in crime is living in Ireland where he's not subject to the term's & conditions of his release!.

I'd certainly take your view Tiana Odd Starvation.

My opinion is that if a human was capable of that sort of evil doing at 10 - you'd have to wonder what they'd be capable of now.

I know there will be people coming on preaching 'everyone deserves a second chance' 'they can be reformed' etc etc bullsheet.

They should have been put down.

These guys were defective from the outset.

I wonder are they allowed purchase batteries?

arybvtcw0eolkf

hooradiation wrote: »

You sound positivity ecstatic at that concept. Should i even bother to ask why?

Ecstatic at what, you gave me two scenario's.

hooradiation

Tiana Odd Starvation wrote: »

Ecstatic at what, you gave me two scenario's.

Fine then, pretend you can't read if you must.

Lux23

Did he murder another child?

arybvtcw0eolkf

Lux23 wrote: »

Did he murder another child?

Probably.