Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Jon Venebables

There's no topic on this yet, just wondering what peoples' thoughts and/or opinions are of the whole thing.

Should we be told what he did? Should he be given another new identity at our expense?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«13

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    depends what he did. Im a bit torn on the issue
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    he's already screwed up his first new identity, he had the chance to start again and didn't take it. He knew what would happen if he was ever in trouble with the police again, so i have absolutely no sympathy for him.

    we were talking about this in our tutor group the other day, about why they killed the boy in the first place, and whether it was nature or nurture sort of thing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Don't even get me started on this!

    All I wish to say is they should never have been released to start with. What they did is horrendous and at the ages of 10..........well that just goes to show their evil mentality.

    What annoys me is what someone said about them being released as they were deemed not to be a threat to the public. OK so what about punishment then? You should be in prison for punishment as well, not just to keep you away from the public.

    And, ok we don't know what he has done, but no matter what it is he's clearly done something so in my mind he doesn't even respect the decision to release him, it's such a kick in the teeth for the family and it really makes me angry :banghead:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, of course he should be given a new identity. We live in a civilised nation and do not encourage vigilantism and lynch mobs, whether inside of prisons or out.

    Regarding whether the public needs to know the nature of the crimes, I don't have much of an opinion either way tbh.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fruit Loop wrote: »
    Don't even get me started on this!

    All I wish to say is they should never have been released to start with. What they did is horrendous and at the ages of 10..........well that just goes to show their evil mentality.
    Most poeple would argue the opposite. That it is precisely because they were 10 years old that it was right they were eventually freed.

    They were children, not adults. A ten-year-old child, while capable of understanding right and wrong, does not fully understand the implication of their actions. Had they been adults, you could have argued for much tougher sentences.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Yes, of course he should be given a new identity. .

    Thought I may as well chime in with my opinion seeing as I created the topic.

    I don't really care what he did, I don't see that it's relevant. It was serious enough to recall him, that's fair enough.

    I don't believe he should be released again, he's obviously not a reformed character and quite clearly still poses a threat to innocent members of public. He's been given a second chance at life already, so to put it bluntly, he can rot in a cell until he dies.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Most poeple would argue the opposite. That it is precisely because they were 10 years old that it was right they were eventually freed.

    They were children, not adults. A ten-year-old child, while capable of understanding right and wrong, does not fully understand the implication of their actions. Had they been adults, you could have argued for much tougher sentences.

    Well I'm sorry but I don't buy that, when I was 10 I knew it was wrong to take a child from their mother, walk to a secluded area, torture them and then leave their body I'm sorry but it was murder and in an horrendous way. My opinion is that anyone who is capable of such crime, no matter what age, clearly isn't right in the head. And if I were that dense at the age of 10 and had commited such a crime then at the age of 18 when I became an adult I would be asking them to keep me in prison! I would not be able to live with myself for doing something so terrible that I would want the punishment so that I could actually live with myself.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Thought I may as well chime in with my opinion seeing as I created the topic.

    I don't really care what he did, I don't see that it's relevant. It was serious enough to recall him, that's fair enough.

    I don't believe he should be released again, he's obviously not a reformed character and quite clearly still poses a threat to innocent members of public. He's been given a second chance at life already, so to put it bluntly, he can rot in a cell until he dies.
    Don't necessarily disagree, though I thought you were asking whether he should be freed but allow the public to know his identity and let him at their mercy. That should never be allowed.
  • littlemissylittlemissy Posts: 9,972 Supreme Poster
    I am rather torn on this and think back to the 2 boys from Edlington which was in the news recently. Venables and Thompson were 2 10 year old boys. They were children who were only just 'legally responsible' for their actions. Regardless of what Fruit Loop says, a lot of 10y/o are not as aware of what their actions mean to other people. Last year I taught 27 of them and some of them were more mature than others, some had no idea of consequences of actions. I spent a lot of time trying to deal with that.

    These were 2 boys that somehow slid through the system - their homelives must have been absolutely horrendous to even consider doing what they did. These were 2 boys who were never going to have a normal life - they spent their adolescence in prison and then suddenly expected to find their own way. Tbh, I am amazed that one of them didn't do something before now.

    Now, obviously I do not condone at all what these boys did, nor do I condone whatever it was Venables as done recently (sex offence according to the Sun?) but I do kinda feel a tad sorry for them.

    But as for giving him a new identity - definitely. As much as I don't condone what he did in the first place, vigilantism should not be allowed to take place.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The problem is that papers like the Sun just want to ID him, for them it's about selling papers. Then they'd sell more with their "WellDone£ headline when someone kills him.

    No responsibility there.

    It's precisely because of the media that we cannot know what he is going back inside for. Knowing would make it easier to ID him.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Don't necessarily disagree, though I thought you were asking whether he should be freed but allow the public to know his identity and let him at their mercy. That should never be allowed.


    Nope, hopefully they'll leave him in jail until he dies so he can't hurt anyone else. If that means he's put in his own cell to stop the other inmates getting to him then fine, he's had his chance which was one more chance than he deserved.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »

    I don't really care what he did, I don't see that it's relevant. It was serious enough to recall him, that's fair enough.

    I've not being pqaying attention to this, but I though he'd been recalled due to allegations - so it's a little early to be deciding to throw away the key
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think, if he was released with conditions and he broke the conditions then he should go back inside.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    I think, if he was released with conditions and he broke the conditions then he should go back inside.

    I *think* it was the mirror that said he broke his conditions - something about going back to Liverpool where James was murdered?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't get it though. Most people would see being barred from Liverpool for life as a blessing rather than a sentence.









    ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is one of the trickiest issues in criminal justice of modern times methinks.

    Here's where I stand on the issue:

    1. I do not for a moment think that Venables and Thompson should have been locked up indefinitely. Despite the horrific nature of the crime which quite rightly left the nation shocked, I don't for a minute think that at age 10, these boys had a fully developed consciousness of morality, consequence and right and wrong. I can honestly say that at age 10, I didn't have all of those faculties fully developed and I don't think that anyone can. Luke 23:34 springs to mind.

    2. So, having been released, given the high profile nature of the offence, there will always be the risk of reprisals, with the red tops being particularly guilty of stirring this shit up. Hence the Prisons Service or Parole Board (whatever its real name may be) does have a duty to ensure that the buggers are given new identities and not found out.

    3. Which leads us on to where we are now. He's been found out, or has broken the conditions of his release and you and I must stump up for more relocation and a new identity etc.

    whilst I won't shed any tears if someone does find him out and do what the Sun et al. have been urging people to do, I will feel that somewhere along the line, society has failed him. Two wrongs do not make a right. I'm just glad that all of these exceptionally tricky decisions are not mine to make.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We should indeed be told what he's done now, but we almost certainly won't be. There is some horseshit doing the rounds that if it were to be revealed, people would soon work out his real identity. Disingenous in the extreme and utterly unbelievable. It's even worse the Government seem split on this as well. The Home Secretary said on Wednesday we should be told, yet later the same day Jack "Man Of" Straw said no details were to be released. The Prime Mentalist, fresh from throwing Nokias around the office after being given his latest news sandwich, trots gives out the same line.

    As for whether Venables should be given yet another identity, the answer is a categorical no. He has already had all this money spent on him - wasted now, it seems - and I see no reason why taxpayers should have to protect him furthermore. There are reports doing the rounds today that he has effectively outed himself whilst in prison. If these reports are true, then it's entirely his own fault and he should be left to fend for himself from here on. And if the cunt ends up dead as a consequence, tough. Forgive me whilst I fail to shed any tears for a child murderer.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    1. I do not for a moment think that Venables and Thompson should have been locked up indefinitely. Despite the horrific nature of the crime which quite rightly left the nation shocked, I don't for a minute think that at age 10, these boys had a fully developed consciousness of morality, consequence and right and wrong. I can honestly say that at age 10, I didn't have all of those faculties fully developed and I don't think that anyone can.

    I think that a child of 10 does know right from wrong but, as you imply, they might not see the full impact and consequences of their actions on themselves and the wider family/community.

    Having said that, a 10 year old ought to know that killing another child is wrong but I suspect that there is a lot more to this than them being two maladjusted boys.

    By all accounts, they had very difficult childhoods and were not given the love, discipline and direction in life that most of us take for granted.

    I think that Venables' identity should be kept secret until he is found guilty. Unfortunately, if he is indeed found guilty and of a truly serious crime, then that anonymity must go and he should spend the rest of his life in prison. Some people are unrehabilitable.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    We should indeed be told what he's done now, but we almost certainly won't be.

    Why should we be told? What good will it do?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The usual ranting ;).

    The main reason we shouldn't find out who he is (at least not yet) is because to do so will mean his solicitor will be able to sucessfully argue that he has no chance of having a fair trial.

    I personally would hate to see a potential victim not getting the justice they deserve because of the thirst for blood everyone seems to have in finding out who he is.

    There is a good chance that by finding out what the crime is he will be identified. As it stands the victim and the cops who arrested him still won't know who it is they arrested. When he was arrested his alias will have red flagged with the chief constable of whichever force it was and his probation officer. The probation officer will have intervened and they will have recalled him.
    If for example he has raped someone, it won't take 30 seconds for the arresting officer to realise and start telling his mates on shift "guess who i nicked yesterday". Those blokes will go home and tell their wives "guess who Fred nicked the other night" e.t.c. e.t.c.

    Once he's been convicted of this latest offence then yes, leave him to rot and sod giving him a new identity. Until then, it needs to be kept a secret.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't want to know who he is, as long as there is fairness and justice, I don't care beyond that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    I don't want to know who he is, as long as there is fairness and justice, I don't care beyond that.

    I don't want to know either.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There was a debate on this in the commons this afternoon with Jack Straw explaining the reasons why it hasn't been made public (as I suggested) and other MP's criticising the media for whipping everyone into a frenzy
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is one of the trickiest issues in criminal justice of modern times methinks.

    Here's where I stand on the issue:

    1. I do not for a moment think that Venables and Thompson should have been locked up indefinitely. Despite the horrific nature of the crime which quite rightly left the nation shocked, I don't for a minute think that at age 10, these boys had a fully developed consciousness of morality, consequence and right and wrong. I can honestly say that at age 10, I didn't have all of those faculties fully developed and I don't think that anyone can. Luke 23:34 springs to mind.

    My 10 pence worth, since it's a case I cared a lot about and I still remember the guilt and shame everyone felt across the town I lived in when that footage of people doing nothing to stop the abduction was endlessly shown on New North West.

    I'd agree with you here Thunderstruck. I think the more I've heard over the years about the details of the killing, the more obvious it is that what happened was part of a distorted and disturbed fantasy life between two extremely disturbed children. The way the killing is talked about these days it's almost of if it's seen as if it was two bullies that went too far - whereas the details make it clear it was one of the most horrific crimes the UK has seen.

    That's actually meant to reinforce what Thunder's saying here - that it's pretty inconceivable that the two boys involved could of had a real understanding of the implication of their actions. There's a wealth of evidence about the damaging upbringing both received. Bear in mind one families solution to keeping one of the kids indoors was to stop letting him have shoes, it's that mountain of tiny details that grew to the evidence of two horribly damaged children who'd been failed by those that should have nurtured and protected them. Whether that's the family, social services, the police or their community - no one really escapes from this with anything but guilt.

    I do wonder if the violent anger that's always displayed around the case is in some ways a reflection of that responsibility. Given we live in a society which created the situation of those two 10 year olds, I guess it's easier to pretend they are aberrations or monsters rather than try to address what failed and shoulder some of the blame of what happened to Jamie Bulger and to them.

    Having said that, given the crime they will always remain on license. In return for freedom, given what they've done before, the justice system asks for a promise of behaviour. If that's been broken then it may be that it'll be decided that Venables should return for an extended period of time to prison. Certainly if the crimes he's being accused of do relate to issues around child abuse images then that may be enough for the courts to consider an extended period of evaluation would be required before any possible release could again be considered.

    It's kind of tragic to see it's Venables as well, like the head of the investigation quoted in early BBC reports, it seemed he would have the most hope of finding some form of normality.

    Either way, to me it's a difficult and politically loaded case and I'd like to see the Justice system work the way it should - impartially and behind close doors. By all means explain the final decision but that's all I'd need to hear.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    We should indeed be told what he's done now, but we almost certainly won't be. There is some horseshit doing the rounds that if it were to be revealed, people would soon work out his real identity. Disingenous in the extreme and utterly unbelievable. It's even worse the Government seem split on this as well. The Home Secretary said on Wednesday we should be told, yet later the same day Jack "Man Of" Straw said no details were to be released. The Prime Mentalist, fresh from throwing Nokias around the office after being given his latest news sandwich, trots gives out the same line.

    As for whether Venables should be given yet another identity, the answer is a categorical no. He has already had all this money spent on him - wasted now, it seems - and I see no reason why taxpayers should have to protect him furthermore. There are reports doing the rounds today that he has effectively outed himself whilst in prison. If these reports are true, then it's entirely his own fault and he should be left to fend for himself from here on. And if the cunt ends up dead as a consequence, tough. Forgive me whilst I fail to shed any tears for a child murderer.

    I mostly agree with this. There's a limit to what people can blame on their childhood, even a horribly abusive one, and there's a limit to how much money and effort people can recieve. We should aim to be a civilised society, but we don't have unlimited resources and there are so many more deserving people who could be helped. When I was a child most of my friends were abused, and it seemed to make them grow up quicker rather than slower. They wanted to protect their younger siblings rather than hurt them, which seems to me to be the natural response. I find the idea that a ten year old might not know that torturing a baby to death is wrong very strange. I don't know what most people would gain by knowing what his latest crime is though.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    **haven't read every post**
    But, I don't think we should have to be told. We aren't told about the crimes of every other murderer in the world. I don't think that anybody, apart from the police and what not, need to know what he's done now. And, I don't think that the jury etc. should cast jugment on him because of his previous crimes. The more this in drummed up in the media, the less likely it is for him to have a fair trail if it goes to court.
    But the thing that wound me up most, is the mother of the child that was killed saying she had a right to know! NO she doesn't. Of course she doesn't! It has nothing to do with her in the slightest.
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I got sent the best (hopefully) piss take Daily Mail comment:

    "We should have hung them when they were ten. Killing children is wrong." :D

    The use of hung instead of hanged makes we worry that it's not a piss take though...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The article in the Independent that Big Gay links to is pretty spot-on.

    I think Big Gay's quote text and the below extract fairly sum up my opinions on the matter:
    Let us not fall for the line, often peddled by media hate-spreaders, that there is some kind of public entitlement in the case of Jon Venables, that we, the virtuous, ordinary, law-abiding people, have a right to know what he has done.
Sign In or Register to comment.