john venables returned to prison

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294282 wrote: You do not represent the public, you express your opinions which tend to be way right of centre and therefore not representative.

It was also perfectly reasonable for Limmy to mention that he was in the Probation Service as it is relevant to his having access to details of the breach of conditions that occurred.

As for a tabloid quoting a tame QC making assumptions with no facts to back them up, I wouldn't even waste the time taken to read it - soundbytes put there to sell copy.
Really? Then why the secrecy? As with any Kid on an ASBO where they are restricted from entering certain area's. They can enter the area any time they like. They only get caught when they carry out another act.

If Venebles entered Merseyside and breached his conditions, under a new Identity for the past 17 years, I doubt any-one would know who he was. It leads most rational thinking people to 'assume' he was stopped by the police for some reason.

I do not actually believe all I read In the tabloids. However, I do believe that the level of secrecy sends out alarm bells to many. If It was a minor breach, why the secrecy?

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294289 wrote: Really? Then why the secrecy? As with any Kid on an ASBO where they are restricted from entering certain area's. They can enter the area any time they like. They only get caught when they carry out another act.

If Venebles entered Merseyside and breached his conditions, under a new Identity for the past 17 years, I doubt any-one would know who he was. It leads most rational thinking people to 'assume' he was stopped by the police for some reason.

I do not actually believe all I read In the tabloids. However, I do believe that the level of secrecy sends out alarm bells to many. If It was a minor breach, why the secrecy?


Isn't it better when you think about what you're posting instead of react and rant?

I would presume that their legal advice is that, given the nature of the case, spreading details over the front page of the tabloids might be prejudicial to any court proceedings that might be needed to determine how long he's to be held. Anything less might give his lawyers an opening to appeal for a flawed hearing.

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294301 wrote: Isn't it better when you think about what you're posting instead of react and rant?

I would presume that their legal advice is that, given the nature of the case, spreading details over the front page of the tabloids might be prejudicial to any court proceedings that might be needed to determine how long he's to be held. Anything less might give his lawyers an opening to appeal for a flawed hearing.
Do you believe that the public has a right to be kept totally In the Dark?

What happened to Freedom of the Press?

Answer me In honesty Bryn.. here's a scenario for you. Your young daughter brings home a new boyfriend. Some months later she annouces she has fallen pregnant. You then learn the new boyfriend Is Venebles. Are you seriously going to protest that a flicker of concern would not enter your mind.?

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294316 wrote: Do you believe that the public has a right to be kept totally In the Dark?

What happened to Freedom of the Press?

Answer me In honesty Bryn.. here's a scenario for you. Your young daughter brings home a new boyfriend. Some months later she annouces she has fallen pregnant. You then learn the new boyfriend Is Venebles. Are you seriously going to protest that a flicker of concern would not enter your mind.?


Would you rather that he was released due to a legal technicality?

Luckily, my daughters are old enough not to be interested.

After that cop-out, if he's changed sufficiently to be attractive to one of my daughters for that long then he must be a totally reformed character - they're all very picky in choosing a mate.

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294318 wrote: Would you rather that he was released due to a legal technicality?

Luckily, my daughters are old enough not to be interested.

After that cop-out, if he's changed sufficiently to be attractive to one of my daughters for that long then he must be a totally reformed character - they're all very picky in choosing a mate.


You have just contadicted yourself by using the word 'Luckily' That tells me you have the same fears as the rest of the public at what Is living amongst us. If not, you would not have used the word 'Luckily'.

You are also saying that there Is every chance he Is not a reformed character In order for your daughters In that scenario to be attracted to him.

In actual fact, given that a breach could mean he spends the rest of his life In prison, I do believe that If the breach Is such as entering Merseyside or missing a curfew, that Is over the top and he could not be expected to never put one foot wrong.

You know as well as I do, If this were any other case, you be calling It a cover-up.

[G#Gill]

I doubt that it will ever be revealed why Venables has been jailed, unless there's a leak ! So it's no good speculating.

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294321 wrote: You have just contadicted yourself by using the word 'Luckily' That tells me you have the same fears as the rest of the public at what Is living amongst us. If not, you would not have used the word 'Luckily'.

You are also saying that there Is every chance he Is not a reformed character In order for your daughters In that scenario to be attracted to him.

In actual fact, given that a breach could mean he spends the rest of his life In prison, I do believe that If the breach Is such as entering Merseyside or missing a curfew, that Is over the top and he could not be expected to never put one foot wrong.

You know as well as I do, If this were any other case, you be calling It a cover-up.


Excuse me but logic has just left the building again.

I said, very specifically, that were he not a reformed caracter my daughters would not be attracted to him - they are, after all, very picky daters. How does this equate to :-

You are also saying that there Is every chance he Is not a reformed character In order for your daughters In that scenario to be attracted to him.


Secondly, given that, technically, any breach, however minor, "could mean he spends the rest of his life In prison "the fact that the tabloids are highlighting that fact sheds no light on the severity of the breach.

And I'll thank you not to tell me what I know or think, whatever the case, I prefer to work from facts rather than suppositions and guesses based on prejudiced and pre-conceived ideas.

[G#Gill]

Apparently, according to the Mirror, Venables was involved with a brawl at work, and a complaint was made, and the police were involved. They (the Mirror) also mentioned that Venables had been involved in drugs since his 'release'. How the heck these papers know these things I haven't a clue! Or are they just guessing?

[el guapo]

James Bulger killer returned to jail 'due to drug use and violence'



James Bulger killer returned to jail 'due to drug use and violence' - Telegraph

[flopstock]

WTF?





Surveillance cameras in the shopping centre filmed Thompson and Venables leading James out of the centre and to his death on a railway line 2 1/2 miles away. Witness after witness testified seeing a crying bleeding James tugged along by the boys, but no-one intervened.
CNN.com - The killers and the victims - June 22, 2001



Two ten year old boys with a bleeding and crying toddler and no one said whoa! Nice. This was a horrific crime for more reasons then just the boys involved, IMO. Lot's of folks should not be sleeping at night.

[Rapunzel]

Betty Boop;1294153 wrote: Well said Limmy!! :yh_clap:yh_clap:yh_clap Sweeping statements and assumptions should be banned!!

I for one sat and wondered last night, how much of a psychological impact this has had on these young men. They committed an horrific offence, no doubt about it, I don't question that in way, shape or form. But, they were ten, they were children. They have to live with the knowledge of what they did for the rest of their lives, I should imagine that to live in their skins must be awful, to live with that guilt must have some sort of negative psychological affect on them. And before everyone starts screaming that they took a life they don't deserve to live, I have no doubt that quite possibly the two that did this would actually rather be dead than be living the lie they have to live now for their own protection.


You're assuming they actually feel regret for what they did. Yet had they felt any sympathy for James they could never have murdered him so cold-bloodedly.

IMO they felt no sympathy or empathy for him. I bet they would be quick to shout "It's not fair" about something that was negative towards them but they wouldn't shout "That's not fair" if it was negative towards someone else.

I know the prison psychologist has claimed they have made huge steps forward and understand the seriousness of what they did and regret it, but how can he see what is truly in their minds? They are clever enough to realise that if they pay lip service to something it will get them their own way - which is to get out of prison quickly.

I don't think they feel any empathy for James or his family at all. I think they are devious enough to understand how to play mind games and to know all the right things to say to make things go their way. I certainly don't believe 8 years was long enough to rehabilitate them.

BB's statement above shows how a normal human being such as you or I would feel. But then, a normal human being would never have contemplated doing anything so evil, let alone carry it out! I personally don't think they felt any empathy or any regret apart from how it affected them. I certainly don't think they find it awful living in their own skins. The only thing they probably don't like is being on the police radar! I wouldn't be surprised if Venables felt immensely powerful at having the power of life and death over a child. If he craves that power again he could so easily become a mass murderer. His psyche is not a normal psyche BB.

[spot]

You seem to imply there's no difference between the mind of a ten year old and the mind of an adult, Rap. That rather goes against received opinion.

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294397 wrote:

And I'll thank you not to tell me what I know or think, whatever the case, I prefer to work from facts rather than suppositions and guesses based on prejudiced and pre-conceived ideas. Then practice what you preach Bryn... Don't ever assume you know what I am thinking.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1294477 wrote: You seem to imply there's no difference between the mind of a ten year old and the mind of an adult, Rap. That rather goes against received opinion. Out of Interest Spot, have you ever been close to a 'child' who has murdered or been the one they confide In?

Forget the Probation rubbish that Is spouted. Whilst on remand, their behaviour goes In their favour when sentenced. What they tell the so called experts Inside and what they tell you during visiting are worlds apart.

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294479 wrote: Then practice what you preach Bryn... Don't ever assume you know what I am thinking.


Care to tell me where I have? I respond to what you type rather that tell you what you know.

[Oscar Namechange]

Rapunzel;1294463 wrote: I know the prison psychologist has claimed they have made huge steps forward and understand the seriousness of what they did and regret it, but how can he see what is truly in their minds? They are clever enough to realise that if they pay lip service to something it will get them their own way - which is to get out of prison quickly.

. Bang On Rap. What they tell the so called experts Is not always the way they are really feeling. Even children as young as 10 are capable of lip service.

remember that after they had killed Jamie, they deliberatly laid his body across the train tracks so on finding the body, the police would think he had wandered onto the lines and his Injuries had been caused by the train. Even at 10 years old, that takes calculated thinking and a devious mind. Then the so called experts believe they can not be hood-winked by them :wah:

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294481 wrote: Care to tell me where I have? I respond to what you type rather that tell you what you know.
If I had enough hours In the day to back track through threads from the past two years, then I would find you examples. I may be a woman Bryn :rolleyes::rolleyes: but I have a very good memory.

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294483 wrote: If I had enough hours In the day to back track through threads from the past two years, then I would find you examples. I may be a woman Bryn :rolleyes::rolleyes: but I have a very good memory.


Then show me - it's not the way I work so I need examples so that I can be better at avoiding it.

[Oscar Namechange]

[QUOTE=Bryn Mawr;1294484]Then show me - it's not the way I work so I need examples so that I can be better at avoiding it.[

Posted by Bryn:

As for a tabloid quoting a tame QC making assumptions with no facts to back them up, I wouldn't even waste the time taken to read it - soundbytes put there to sell copy.

You have assumed that I believe every word printed In the tabloids merely because I pointed out that The Mail quoted a QC.

Your a hypocrite Bryn. I can remember a thread posted here by Spot where you believed every Libelous word printed by a local rag. Even after that local rag printed a retraction and I offered you an E mail from that rag with an offer to settle out of court. You never once posted that you had been wrong. I would have at least had the balls to offer up an apology. Even a senior Police Officer has had the balls to apoligise and admit they were wrong.

However, I am not going to de-rail Guopo's thread.

Back to topic.

[Bryn Mawr]

oscar;1294488 wrote: [quote=Bryn Mawr;1294484]Then show me - it's not the way I work so I need examples so that I can be better at avoiding it.[

Posted by Bryn:

As for a tabloid quoting a tame QC making assumptions with no facts to back them up, I wouldn't even waste the time taken to read it - soundbytes put there to sell copy.

You have assumed that I believe every word printed In the tabloids merely because I pointed out that The Mail quoted a QC.

Your a hypocrite Bryn. I can remember a thread posted here by Spot where you believed every Libelous word printed by a local rag. Even after that local rag printed a retraction and I offered you an E mail from that rag with an offer to settle out of court. You never once posted that you had been wrong. I would have at least had the balls to offer up an apology. Even a senior Police Officer has had the balls to apoligise and admit they were wrong.

However, I am not going to de-rail Guopo's thread.

Back to topic.


Where have i made that assumption? I was responding to your statement :-

In yesterdays Mail a QC was quoted as saying he believed the breach was of a serious nature.


and making no assumption as to your belief in the rest of the paper.

As to my being a hypocrite, I deny it and suggest that you're mis-remembering my posts - maybe confusing them for someone else's?

[Oscar Namechange]

Bryn Mawr;1294489 wrote:



Where have i made that assumption? I was responding to your statement :-



and making no assumption as to your belief in the rest of the paper.

As to my being a hypocrite, I deny it and suggest that you're mis-remembering my posts - maybe confusing them for someone else's?
If I persue this Bryn, I will do It by PM. I do not wish to de-rail the thread.

[Rapunzel]

spot;1294477 wrote: You seem to imply there's no difference between the mind of a ten year old and the mind of an adult, Rap. That rather goes against received opinion.


I wasn't discussing any generic 10 year old and any generic adult Spot, I was commenting purely on Venables.

I work with children of this age and some of them are fully aware of what they are doing and use their age to plead ignorance. Most children are simply that, children who will grow up and mature and become normal adults. But some you worry about, knowing that there is a huge possibility that they will not turn out well.

For instance, I have one boy who is usually the nicest child, but when he becomes annoyed he becomes extremely violent with other children and will beat up little kids and even his best friend, in the playground. He is constantly reprimanded for it but as no physical punishments are allowed he simply continues to lash out whenever he is riled. Tbh I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if he turns out to be a wife-beater.

Another child got fed-up with his cat. So he put her in the washing machine and turned it on! Yes, he killed her. He was 10!

Now he's 11 and mum has bought him another kitten!

I noticed that his arms and hands are now scratched to shreds!

What kind of torture must he have inflicted on that little kitten for it to shred his hands and arms in such terror? I dread to think. Social services are aware of him and his history but have done nothing (as usual).

There are many other things I could tell you about these and other children, except that I cannot. Just know that some children are fully aware of their actions and just don't care about the consequences.

Sorry to derail the thread.

Back to topic.

[Oscar Namechange]

Rapunzel;1294516 wrote: I wasn't discussing any generic 10 year old and any generic adult Spot, I was commenting purely on Venables.

I work with children of this age and some of them are fully aware of what they are doing and use their age to plead ignorance. Most children are simply that, children who will grow up and mature and become normal adults. But some you worry about, knowing that there is a huge possibility that they will not turn out well.

For instance, I have one boy who is usually the nicest child, but when he becomes annoyed he becomes extremely violent with other children and will beat up little kids and even his best friend, in the playground. He is constantly reprimanded for it but as no physical punishments are allowed he simply continues to lash out whenever he is riled. Tbh I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if he turns out to be a wife-beater.

Another child got fed-up with his cat. So he put her in the washing machine and turned it on! Yes, he killed her. He was 10!

Now he's 11 and mum has bought him another kitten!

I noticed that his arms and hands are now scratched to shreds!

What kind of torture must he have inflicted on that kitten for it to shred his hands and arms in such terror? I dread to think. Social services are aware of him and his history but have done nothing (as usual).

There are many other things I could tell you about these and other children, except that I cannot. Just know that some children are fully aware of their actions and just don't care about the consequences.

Sorry to derail the thread.

Back to topic. I've got one like that a few doors from me. His mother laughs at his actions claiming 'But he's a child'. I am one of many many who has commented that we would not be In the least surprised If he goes on to seriously hurt some-one. His actions have even Included breaking the Head teachers wrist and Injuring other teachers. He was eventually removed from the school but Is now medicated each day just to keep his temper In check. He was just 5 years old when he broke the HT wrist and not by accident. I won't go Into details but I took a puppy off him also and got It re-homed!!!

Some-times Intuition Is a far greater weapon than the text book rubbish these so called Professionals come out with.

[Oscar Namechange]

Well Well Well.

James Bulger killer Jon Venables sent back to jail over 'drugs and workplace brawl' | Mail Online

Apparently he flipped and attacked a work colleage.

Apparently he's been using Ecstasy and Cocaine since 2001

Apparently he has been Involved In violence prior..

Now Let's hear the excuses and the the claims that the Mail has made It all up.

How utterly sickening that he Is being legally represented by Human Rights Lawyer Bhatt Murphy . What about The Bulger's Human rights?

[Rapunzel]

oscar;1294518 wrote: I've got one like that a few doors from me. His mother laughs at his actions claiming 'But he's a child'. I am one of many many who has commented that we would not be In the least surprised If he goes on to seriously hurt some-one. His actions have even Included breaking the Head teachers wrist and Injuring other teachers. He was eventually removed from the school but Is now medicated each day just to keep his temper In check. He was just 5 years old when he broke the HT wrist and not by accident. I won't go Into details but I took a puppy off him also and got It re-homed!!!

Some-times Intuition Is a far greater weapon than the text book rubbish these so called Professionals come out with.


It's not even intuition. When you work with children every day you get to really know them. They tell you all about their lives. Parents would be shocked if they realised how much we really know about their lives!

Even problem children tell you how they think and feel and you get a very good idea of how their minds work. The teacher of the boy with the cat is keeping records because she says that one day someone will blame his teacher for him turning out to be whatever he becomes. She has told social services about him and the whole family are on their radar. But single mum has five kids to five fathers and cannot cope. She drinks, smokes and knocks back anti-depressants all day and the kids are left to run wild. That situation happens a lot but some of the kids in that situation are absolutely lovely. They look out for each other and the older ones care for the younger ones. Social services prefer the kids to stay with their families even when they're malnourished and lice-ridden! What can you do? Our hands are tied by red tape.

Sorry this is a bit of a rant. It's a situation I feel very strongly about. :-5:-5:-5

[Oscar Namechange]

Rapunzel;1294523 wrote: It's not even intuition. When you work with children every day you get to really know them. They tell you all about their lives. Parents would be shocked if they realised how much we really know about their lives!

Even problem children tell you how they think and feel and you get a very good idea of how their minds work. The teacher of the boy with the cat is keeping records because she says that one day someone will blame his teacher for him turning out to be whatever he becomes. She has told social services about him and the whole family are on their radar. But single mum has five kids to five fathers and cannot cope. She drinks, smokes and knocks back anti-depressants all day and the kids are left to run wild. That situation happens a lot but some of the kids in that situation are absolutely lovely. They look out for each other and the older ones care for the younger ones. Social services prefer the kids to stay with their families even when they're malnourished and lice-ridden! What can you do? Our hands are tied by red tape.

Sorry this is a bit of a rant. It's a situation I feel very strongly about. :-5:-5:-5
Have you seen my post prior.

The Mail Is reporting Venebles attacked a work mate.

[Rapunzel]

Salient points from Oscars post and link above:



In 2003, both Venables and Thompson were believed to have been treated to a holiday at taxpayers' expense to keep them safe on the tenth anniversary of the toddler's horrific death.

But Venables's attitude was so bad that frustrated police minders threw him across the bonnet of a car - and threatened to leave him chained to a lamp-post in Liverpool to teach him a lesson.

--------------------------------------------------------

Last year only 79 prisoners on life licence out of a possible 1,400 in the community were recalled to prison.

A senior probation source told the Mail: 'You don't recall a prisoner after 16 years of very expensive rehabilitation unless it is something serious.'

--------------------------------------------------------

The source said that the chances of Venables 'remaining undetected' whilst in prison were 'very small'.

'Hitherto there were only a handful of people involved in his care: a probation officer, a senior probation officer, a police officer and someone at the Ministry of Justice.

'Now he is in the prison service the likelihood of him becoming compromised has increased significantly. He will almost certainly need a new identity when he is released.'

--------------------------------------------------------

Eight years of pampering, then a new life

By MICHAEL SEAMARK

At the time, the decision by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson to remain voluntarily in secure children's units for an extra six months after their release order was interpreted as a fear of freedom.

But given what they were leaving behind, who would blame them for their reluctance to leave?

During their eight years of detention, they lived a life of comfort and expensive rehabilitation, cookery lessons and trips to watch Manchester United.

Coming from broken homes and dysfunctional families, they enjoyed an education far better than most of their contemporaries.

Many, not least James's family, were furious that Venables and Thompson were freed without ever spending a day in an adult prison for the shocking murder.

Draconian legal injunctions giving them anonymity for life were put in place when the pair were released in 2001.



Each was given a new identity, backed up passport, birth certificate, National Insurance documents and NHS records. Bank accounts and credit cards were set up under their new names.

They were coached in their cover stories and given elocution lessons to lose their Liverpool accents.

Years of preparation had gone into the boys' release, with personal tutors mentoring Venables during his stay at Red Banks Children's Home, a former approved school at Newton-le-Willows, Merseyside, only 13 miles from the Bulger family home at Kirkby.

Thompson was nine miles further towards Manchester, at Barton Moss, near Eccles.

While serving his sentence, he began letters to friends: 'It's Bobby here, live from the five-star Hotel Barton Moss.'

He had his own room - with TV and PlayStation - in the modern, 20-bed complex, with the use of a garden, gym, games room and computer room.

Thompson, who developed an interest in textiles and design, won praise for a beaded wedding dress he made, as well as a tapestry of a lion's head which hung in the foyer.

He passed five GCSEs and took A-levels, was taken on supervised days out to shopping centres, the Lake District and the theatre at Stratford-upon-Avon to get him used to the public.

For Venables, life at Red Bank - once home to child killer Mary Bell - was even cushier. His regime included a bigger and better room than other inmates - decorated with Manchester United wallpaper and complete with computer, games and a TV.

He could ride scramble motorbikes in the school grounds, enjoyed regular family visits and took trips to Wales and a swimming pool in nearby Wigan.

Every month £25 was put into his account for clothes, £6 for toiletries and £4 for a haircut. For each birthday he received £30 and for Christmas £40, rising to £60 once he was 16.

Before his release he was taken with his father to Old Trafford to watch Manchester United play - ostensibly to get him used to being in large crowds and try to reduce his fear of being recognised and attacked.

Since their release, the legal injunctions mean the public know little about the lifestyles of either Venables or Thompson.

When not working, both are entitled to benefits to ensure neither drifts back into crime.

Both see probation officers at least four times a year and officers are on call 24 hours a day in case either needs help or advice.

In 2003, both were reportedly treated to a holiday at taxpayers' expense to keep them safe on the tenth anniversary of the toddler's horrific death.

But Venables's attitude was so bad that frustrated police minders threw him across the bonnet of a car - and threatened to leave him chained to a lamp-post in Liverpool to teach him a lesson.

In 2005 there were reports that Thompson was addicted to heroin and was being prescribed the substitute methadone to wean him off his habit.

The following year, the Daily Mail revealed that he was gay and had been given permission by his probation service 'minders' to live with his homosexual lover, who was aware of his past.

In 2007 unconfirmed reports suggested Venables was to marry a pretty office worker he started dating two years earlier.

He was taken to hospital for emergency surgery after violence flared in the street when a man tried to chat up his girlfriend. In another, unprovoked attack, he was seriously injured and reportedly went to a hospital on Merseyside for treatment - although he is banned from returning to the scene of his crime without permission.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

THE £5.5M BILL

The Bulger case is already estimated to have cost the taxpayer £5.5million. Here is the breakdown:

Police investigation: £500,000

Murder trial (prosecution and defence costs): £1million

Time killers spent in custody in secure units: £2.5million

Setting up and maintaining new identities for Venables, Thompson and families: £1.5million

[Oscar Namechange]

Funny.

No posts from those who were quick to slam me for making 'assumptions'.

Perhaps the Newbie who claimed to be In the Probation Servive would like to return and explain the Daily Mail's findings?

It's gone very quiet around here.

[theia]

oscar;1294541 wrote: Funny.

No posts from those who were quick to slam me for making 'assumptions'.

Perhaps the Newbie who claimed to be In the Probation Servive would like to return and explain the Daily Mail's findings?

It's gone very quiet around here.


I thought this thread was about comments and opinions on a terrible, terrible case, and its consequences. None of us knows and probably never will. Surely the tragic events in themselves are enough without the unnecessary complication of trying to prove whose opinion is "more right?"

[Oscar Namechange]

theia;1294564 wrote: I thought this thread was about comments and opinions on a terrible, terrible case, and its consequences. None of us knows and probably never will. Surely the tragic events in themselves are enough without the unnecessary complication of trying to prove whose opinion is "more right?"
It Is not about 'more right'.

It would have been Interesting to debate weather re-hab In Venebles case was a failure etc etc. It just seems the one's who poo poo-ed the Idea of him attacking another person are now absent.

[flopstock]

oscar;1294566 wrote: It Is not about 'more right'.



It would have been Interesting to debate weather re-hab In Venebles case was a failure etc etc. It just seems the one's who poo poo-ed the Idea of him attacking another person are now absent.


I don't understand the point of rehab in these situations anyways, TBH. I feel similar about mothers who murder their family and everyone wants them treated rather then put down. I think it's more humane to just put them to sleep. If they ever get 'fixed' enough to really appreciate what they did, they wouldn't be able to live with themselves anyways. and if they don't get fixed enough, they have no business around the rest of the worlds families.



There is another one out there who is probably all juiced up just imagining what is happening to the first, behind bars. I certainly hope someone is keeping a serious eye on him.

[G#Gill]

I am bound to agree with you Floppy.

With regard to all the hoo ha about Venables being locked up, but nobody saying why, I think maybe that there is a court case pending and of course things cannot be discussed before the case is heard. I am sure that in the fullness of time, the world will be told what Venables did that caused him to be taken into custody. That is depending, maybe, on if Venables actually survives the jail where he is at the moment. It would only need a slip of the tongue by a warder, and the whole jail would know that the new kid on the block is the guy who savagely smashed up a little tot of two. I expect Venables is in either solitary or VP wing (vulnerable person). But I'm sure the cat will be out of the bag soon enough.

[flopstock]

G#Gill;1294605 wrote: I am bound to agree with you Floppy.



With regard to all the hoo ha about Venables being locked up, but nobody saying why, I think maybe that there is a court case pending and of course things cannot be discussed before the case is heard. I am sure that in the fullness of time, the world will be told what Venables did that caused him to be taken into custody. That is depending, maybe, on if Venables actually survives the jail where he is at the moment. It would only need a slip of the tongue by a warder, and the whole jail would know that the new kid on the block is the guy who savagely smashed up a little tot of two. I expect Venables is in either solitary or VP wing (vulnerable person). But I'm sure the cat will be out of the bag soon enough.


Imagine being the guy he 'allegedly' attacked this time.



Would they be restricted from talking with anyone and saying this guys new name?

[Rapunzel]

G#Gill;1294605 wrote: I am bound to agree with you Floppy.

With regard to all the hoo ha about Venables being locked up, but nobody saying why, I think maybe that there is a court case pending and of course things cannot be discussed before the case is heard. I am sure that in the fullness of time, the world will be told what Venables did that caused him to be taken into custody. That is depending, maybe, on if Venables actually survives the jail where he is at the moment. It would only need a slip of the tongue by a warder, and the whole jail would know that the new kid on the block is the guy who savagely smashed up a little tot of two. I expect Venables is in either solitary or VP wing (vulnerable person). But I'm sure the cat will be out of the bag soon enough.


You don't need the fullness of time.

Oscars link has already told you that Venables has been taking drugs since his release and has beaten up several members of the public, including a work colleague and a chap who tried to chat up Venables' ex-girlfriend.

The quote reads:

Sources say the murderer, who is now 27, 'flipped' and attacked a colleague and had been using Ecstasy and cocaine since his release in 2001.

It also emerged that Venables has been hospitalised twice since he was freed after becoming involved in violent altercations.


And in my quote from Oscar's link, I informed you that:



Rapunzel;1294528 wrote:

The source said that the chances of Venables 'remaining undetected' whilst in prison were 'very small'.

'Hitherto there were only a handful of people involved in his care: a probation officer, a senior probation officer, a police officer and someone at the Ministry of Justice.

'Now he is in the prison service the likelihood of him becoming compromised has increased significantly. He will almost certainly need a new identity when he is released.'



THE £5.5M BILL

The Bulger case is already estimated to have cost the taxpayer £5.5million. Here is the breakdown:

Police investigation: £500,000

Murder trial (prosecution and defence costs): £1million

Time killers spent in custody in secure units: £2.5million

Setting up and maintaining new identities for Venables, Thompson and families: £1.5million


So I'm sure his new identity will become known and then the taxpayer will have to unwittingly fork out even more money for his and his family's next set of new identities! :-5

[Rapunzel]

flopstock;1294609 wrote:

Would they be restricted from talking with anyone and saying this guys new name?


Whenever anything happens - whether it's a military invasion or something to do with the government or something official - nobody who is 'in the know' is allowed to speak about it.

That's why the press always interview retired major-generals or people who used to be in that job, so that they can understand the point of view the military or government are working from without getting the usual 'no comment' comment from those currently in power.

Therefore the press will interview people who know/knew Venables, both as a child and using his most recent identity, and they'll interview ex-paroleboard officials and ex-probation service employees in order to get a good all-round picture (which may or may not be biased) of Venables. Obviously his new identity will come up as informants are usually well-paid for their information. You can't stop everyone from giving his identity away.

He needn't worry. It sounds like he's protected for life - unlike all the innocent victims - both his and others. Hmpf!

[Oscar Namechange]

flopstock;1294601 wrote: I don't understand the point of rehab in these situations anyways, TBH. I feel similar about mothers who murder their family and everyone wants them treated rather then put down. I think it's more humane to just put them to sleep. If they ever get 'fixed' enough to really appreciate what they did, they wouldn't be able to live with themselves anyways. and if they don't get fixed enough, they have no business around the rest of the worlds families.



There is another one out there who is probably all juiced up just imagining what is happening to the first, behind bars. I certainly hope someone is keeping a serious eye on him.


I agree with you also Flop.

It has been argued In this country that re-hab Is the the better route than long term Imprisonment. I have never agreed. Due to my own personal circumstances, I know better than any-one here that what some-one tells their So called Proffessionals Inside Is a world away from what they really feel and think. That only comes out to those they trust In visiting hours.

I have always believed In the case of Venebles that If a 10 year old child Is capable of cold Pre-meditated thought such as him laying the babies body on the train tracks so that Police may believe his Injuries were caused by the train hitting him, then he was capable of paying lip service to the Professionals.

For all the Bleeding heart liberals who believe that he would suffer Un-Imaginable torture living with what he has done, then I do not believe you can give any-one such qualities as regret, compassion and a conscience.

What I find disgusting Is that he now has to be given yet another false Identity costing British Tax Payers another £ Million. Why should we? He had a new Identity and he blew It, not just once but It appears time after time.

How much longer Is our Government going to wipe the backside of this seriel Offender? Why does he seem to have more rights that decent law abiding folks and the Parents of Jamie Bulger?

On the 10th Anniversary of Jamie's death, his murderer was given a day out at the tax payers expense. I wonder how Mr and Mrs Bulger would have celebrated their sons tenth Birthday?

There are many many kids who come from 'toxic' enviroments as children but they go on to be decent people. As far as I am concerned the excuses that re-hab Is better than life Imprisonment have run out. They have absolutly no argument now and I shall enjoy watching the so called experts squirm their way out of this one.

The Government needs to sit up and take note of the Petition by The Sun newspaper and see how many of the public Is sick to death of the criminals rights being put before that of hard working decent people who pay the tax to keep the likes of Venebles anonomous.

It really says It all that at his hearing, Instead of having a run of the mill defence lawyer, he has been appointed a well know Human Rights Lawyer. What next? Is he going to claim that his human rights were breached by the terms of his Licence? I'd not be a bit surprised if he does.



Spot... You have argued on many threads that re-hab Is the route In cases like this. I am very dissapointed to see that you have been on line yet prefer not to return to this thread and argue the subject. Is that a cop out?

[K.Snyder]

It's blatantly obvious that a "life license" has to symbolize a continuance of "rehabilitation". One cannot suggest that releasing a prisoner on a "life license" is already rehabilitated otherwise they'd serve to negate their very reasoning to suggest those having been released are "absolutely no risk to the public".

With that, I fear the day anyone with the power believes prior instances of said parolees implies the slightest bit of relevancy toward other offenders.

These murderers have absolutely no desire to kill again because they know they'll be caught this time, which is the only difference between now and when they'd murdered that poor boy

I'll never abide by this philosophy because quite frankly it's a danger to society regardless of other irrelevant motivations!

[Oscar Namechange]

K.Snyder;1294783 wrote: It's blatantly obvious that a "life license" has to symbolize a continuance of "rehabilitation". One cannot suggest that releasing a prisoner on a "life license" is already rehabilitated otherwise they'd serve to negate their very reasoning to suggest those having been released are "absolutely no risk to the public".

With that, I fear the day anyone with the power believes prior instances of said parolees implies the slightest bit of relevancy toward other offenders.

These murderers have absolutely no desire to kill again because they know they'll be caught this time, which is the only difference between now and when they'd murdered that poor boy

I'll never abide by this philosophy because quite frankly it's a danger to society regardless of other irrelevant motivations! What you seem to not have In the US that we have here, Is the hypocricy In the Penal System.

We have morons such as Jack Straw making descisions for us. The two boys who murdered Jamie Bulger were 18 when they were released and had their whole like ahead of them. Yet, Ronnie Biggs for example, at the age of 79 with failing health and not much longer to live was denied release to die at home with his family despite It being deemed that he posed no threat at all. Although a man died of his Injuries later as a result of the Great train Robbery, Biggs never actually killed any-one.

We then have a serial thug 'Jack Tweed' who attacked a 15 year old with a golf club, then a taxi driver being released of his curfew restrictions because he was getting married FFS.

When you say the murderers have no desire to kill again for fear of getting caught, then you are refering to how most people would think. It's been argued for many years that Venebles Is physcotic. If he Is Physcotic, that kind of rational thinking doesn't kick In when, as described In the newspaper, they flip and attack some-one. Let's face It, If he was In any way normal, he would not have tortured and battered a baby for hours on end, what ever his age.

[spot]

oscar;1294717 wrote: Spot... You have argued on many threads that re-hab Is the route In cases like this. I am very dissapointed to see that you have been on line yet prefer not to return to this thread and argue the subject. Is that a cop out?


No, I thought I said earlier I'd comment once there were some facts instead of all the tabloid inventions that are filling the airwaves. At some point in the future we'll have the story in a believable form. If it involves a honeytrap set up by news reporters I'd not be the least bit surprised, his identity and location seem to have been common knowledge in those circles for a considerable while.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1294801 wrote: No, I thought I said earlier I'd comment once there were some facts instead of all the tabloid inventions that are filling the airwaves. At some point in the future we'll have the story in a believable form. If it involves a honeytrap set up by news reporters I'd not be the least bit surprised, his identity and location seem to have been common knowledge in those circles for a considerable while. Come On Old Boy... It's a cop out and you know It.

I was refering to other threads of similar nature where you have claimed that all young children such as this case can be successfully re-habilitated.

As for the tabloids. There has to be an element of truth In which they print or the law suits would be piled to the Ceiling down at Fleet Street.

You yourself posted a thread here based on a Trainee Hack's writings who had been In the job three weeks when she was assigned to a trial. On that thread, no amount of telling you that the local rag had got It wholly Inacurate would sway you to think otherwise dispite every National newspaper reporting on that case correctly.

When I wrote earlier that I myself believed It had to be some-thing serious with Venebles, I was not making assumptions, It Is common sense. He would not be Incarcerated and be appointed a Human Rights Lawyer If he had got a parking ticket or not paid his TV license.

You are no different to all the so called experts who are now squirming that the re-hab route for child killers has failed.

I'd have more respect for you If you could actually debate what has been written In the Mail rather than pour scorn on their findings.

So you believe every word a local rag tells you when It suits but the moment you are wrong... The newspaper Is Inaccurate? It doesn't wash Spot.

[abbey]

oscar;1294800 wrote: What you seem to not have In the US that we have here, Is the hypocricy In the Penal System.

We have morons such as Jack Straw making descisions for us. The two boys who murdered Jamie Bulger were 18 when they were released and had their whole like ahead of them. Yet, Ronnie Biggs for example, at the age of 79 with failing health and not much longer to live was denied release to die at home with his family despite It being deemed that he posed no threat at all. Although a man died of his Injuries later as a result of the Great train Robbery, Biggs never actually killed any-one.

.
Biggs was released in August 09

[Oscar Namechange]

abbey;1294864 wrote: Biggs was released in August 09
I know Abbs Thankyou. I was making the point to a US member that Initially he was denied release and the hypocricy between the two cases.

[Rapunzel]

crikeymoses;1294862 wrote: This is a complex situation, not acknowledged by the lynch mob brigade - here or in the uk tabloid press.

Someone, somewhere, (not here) suggested that the trial of the children Venables and Thompson did James Bulger and society no favours in that it was in effect a show trial, a trial of children in an adult court, and the pressing need to discover the reasons behind these 10 year old children's murder of another child wasn't on the agenda at all. This has been true since, because the public has been given (officially) only brief glimpses of their progress in custody and upon their release in 2001 not a lot more.

But we have no choice but to trust the "authorities" on this, and the current situation; because how many of us, really, would know how - justly - to handle any of it. We don't have capital punishment in uk, and when we did we didn't execute 10 year olds, in the 20th century anyway. Adult murderers rarely get "banged up" for their whole lives, so these two were bound to be released some time; and no-one could predict how their lives might turn out once left unsupported in the way they were prior to release.

I think we have to suspend judgement. Let's wait and see.


Welcome to FG CM, I hope you stick around and join in.

I agree with what you say, we don't have capital punishment and we certainly wouldn't have used it on 2 10 year old boys even if we did believe in it.

I think the only thing I would say is that 18 was too young to be released. Kids of 18 are generally rash, they don't think of the consequences to their actions. Maybe the government thought they'd have a better chance in life if they could detail their work experience from the age of 18. Personally, I think they should have stayed in detention until they were at least 25 and maybe even longer. They should have been released when they were older, calmer(?) and perhaps more responsible.

They've cost the taxpayer so much already, this would surely have not cost that much more (especially in light of recent events).

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1294801 wrote: No, I thought I said earlier I'd comment once there were some facts instead of all the tabloid inventions that are filling the airwaves. At some point in the future we'll have the story in a believable form. If it involves a honeytrap set up by news reporters I'd not be the least bit surprised, his identity and location seem to have been common knowledge in those circles for a considerable while.
Ok Spot... The Latest.

Jack Straw has admitted that Venebles was re-called to custody and Is facing 'Very' serious Allegations.

Jack's Straws word good enough for you Is It?

James Bulger killer Jon Venables worked as a bouncer at a nightclub | Mail Online

Or Is Jack Straw making assumptions??

[Rapunzel]

So the Daily Mirror may not be the most highly regarded newspaper - more chip wrapper than reference tome (and very nice chips they were, actually - but todays Mirror had some quite shocking revelations to make on Jon Venables.

Not only did he go back to Liverpool - from which he was banned - he went back clubbing and partying all around Liverpool's nightclubs!

Skulking into Liverpool under his new identity, James Bulgers killer Jon Venables cynically flouted his strict parole rules to go on wild benders with mates.

In a cruel snub to the memory of the innocent toddler he and Robert Thompson battered to death, the 27-year-old hit the nightclubs to get smashed on cider and cocktails while snorting cocaine and popping ecstasy pills.



Sources revealed Venables has also slipped into Goodison Park to watch Everton play football in the nine years since he was freed from jail, despite being banned from Merseyside.

The barbaric thug even clumsily chatted up women in clubs not too far away from where he and Thompson killed two-year-old James in 1993. During his sessions he would down Cheeky Vimtos, a lethal cocktail made up of two shots of port and a bottle of blue WKD.

And it is said he has snorted kitty, a legal drug also known as methadrone, miaow or MCAT. It produces a similar experience to ecstasy and cocaine.

The Mirror can reveal Venables has frequented a series of different clubs and bars including Krazy House, The Funky Box, Bar Fly and Walkabout.

Clubbers danced, drank and chatted happily nearby, unaware they were in the presence of one of Britains most notorious child murderers.

Sources have claimed Venables would regularly knock back up to eight pints of Strongbow during his nights out. He has visited the Cavern Club historic home of The Beatles and watched the band Keane at the Liverpool Arena.

Our well-placed sources told how Venables insisted on staying in Liverpool for as long as possible.

He would often leave his friends and wander off on his own. It is understood he would then head for the railway station where he'd wait for the first train in the morning to get back home. (The railway where he killed and dumped little Jamie Bulger's body! What a slap in the face for Jamie's parents!!)

And that he has been able to slip in and out unnoticed to the city where he carried out such a horrific crime, will spark national outrage.

The fact he has been enjoying Premiership football will also be a bitter pill to swallow for Denise, especially as he and Thompson denied that simple boyhood pleasure to her tragic son, who would have turned 19 in two weeks.

Our sources told how Venables wore an Everton shirt to matches.

The killer is back behind bars after breaching his parole conditions.

Yesterday, the Mirror revealed how the yob had been in a violent bust-up at work. It has not been confirmed whether that was the specific reason for his dramatic recall to prison.

Venables has also been a regular cocaine and ecstasy abuser since he was freed from jail in 2001. That and his violent temper have resulted in several brushes with the law.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-storie ... -22086346/

My only question is:

If his minders knew how badly he had flouted the terms of his release.....why wasn't he picked up and re-incarcerated sooner???

[Oscar Namechange]

Rapunzel;1294875 wrote:

If his minders knew how badly he had flouted the terms of his release.....why wasn't he picked up and re-incarcerated sooner???
It gets worse Rap.

The Sun Newspaper tonight claims they know the full details of a 'sickening' sex attck carried out by Venebles but Government Lawyers are gagging them.

Jon Venables faces a sex charge | The Sun |News

[Rapunzel]

oscar;1294874 wrote: Ok Spot... The Latest.

Jack Straw has admitted that Venebles was re-called to custody and Is facing 'Very' serious Allegations.

Jack's Straws word good enough for you Is It?

James Bulger killer Jon Venables worked as a bouncer at a nightclub | Mail Online

Or Is Jack Straw making assumptions??


Thankyou for that link Oscar.

I was also going to mention that he had been a bouncer, even though he was not supposed to be in a job which used violence!

And as for the fact that your link states that Venables has been accused of committing a sex crime? According to the Mirror he's been downloading child porn off the internet! (Whilst being supervised by probation officers)

(Is anyone even surprised???)

Jon Venables sent back to prison over child porn offence - mirror.co.uk

[Rapunzel]

oscar;1294877 wrote: It gets worse Rap.

The Sun Newspaper tonight claims they know the full details of a 'sickening' sex attck carried out by Venebles but Government Lawyers are gagging them.

Jon Venables faces a sex charge | The Sun |News


Oops! Didn't see that but I've just replied to it anyway!

[Oscar Namechange]

crikeymoses;1294862 wrote: This is a complex situation, not acknowledged by the lynch mob brigade - here or in the uk tabloid press.

Someone, somewhere, (not here) suggested that the trial of the children Venables and Thompson did James Bulger and society no favours in that it was in effect a show trial, a trial of children in an adult court, and the pressing need to discover the reasons behind these 10 year old children's murder of another child wasn't on the agenda at all. This has been true since, because the public has been given (officially) only brief glimpses of their progress in custody and upon their release in 2001 not a lot more.

But we have no choice but to trust the "authorities" on this, and the current situation; because how many of us, really, would know how - justly - to handle any of it. We don't have capital punishment in uk, and when we did we didn't execute 10 year olds, in the 20th century anyway. Adult murderers rarely get "banged up" for their whole lives, so these two were bound to be released some time; and no-one could predict how their lives might turn out once left unsupported in the way they were prior to release.

I think we have to suspend judgement. Let's wait and see. My apologies, I missed your post.

Unfortunately, the newspapers tonight are printing our worst fears.

For the record, I do not believe that at 10 years old, Corporal Punishment would not have been the answer with the two boys any more than It would with the Eddlington boys or Mary Bell. If what we have read over the years, all come from toxic home-lives where violence Is the norm.

I agree with Rap, that the more sensible course of action would have been to not release the two boys until they were well Into adulthood when their Understanding Is more rational than a hormonal teen.

My anger Is directed at the bungling so called experts who spout that they know best and take a descision that possibly puts Innocent people at risk.

In many ways, Yes, It was a show trial. However, the Nation was rightly Out-raged by the murder and as It has been proved now, the public demand answers. Why shouldn't we? It's our tax that has kept him anonymous for the past 17 years. Why should we not have the right to be Informed as to what risks the public were put at by releasing him after only 8 years?