Jeremy Bamber Forum
OFF TOPIC => General => Topic started by: Steve_uk on December 29, 2016, 06:19:PM
-
This recommendation follows a report by Charles Taylor from the National College of Teaching, commissioned by former Education Secretary Michael Gove. Currently any child appearing in a youth court is granted anonymity, but in the Crown Court Social Services must apply for a reporting restriction and reapply when the offender reaches 18 years of age.
Advocates of the policy say that anonymity would give the offenders a chance to reintegrate into society and make them less likely to reoffend. Those against say that the public has a right to know, and that naming and shaming acts as a deterrent to other would-be miscreants.
An example of complete anonymity is the Edlington Two, brothers who tortured two other boys when they were ten and almost killed them. The offenders are now 18 and 19 and have been granted lifelong anonymity. However Will Cornick, who was 15 when he stabbed to death teacher Ann Maguire in 2014 was named in the Press after the judge lifted reporting restrictions in the public interest.
-
No. Let it be part of the punishment. A child criminal usually grows up to be an adult one,so let their names be made public in order to trace them in their adult lives should the need arise.
-
No. Let it be part of the punishment. A child criminal usually grows up to be an adult one,so let their names be made public in order to trace them in their adult lives should the need arise.
That may be true lookout, but it's hard enough to get a job today without the stigma of an infamous crime hanging round your neck. It's really an employer's market. I suppose they could be given new identities like Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.
-
That may be true lookout, but it's hard enough to get a job today without the stigma of an infamous crime hanging round your neck. It's really an employer's market. I suppose they could be given new identities like Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.
Steve,it's an utter insult to the victims that criminals are given new identities then all the fuss and bother of also being given accommodation in different areas. It's this sort of sheer nonsense that is helping toward the draining of resources from the needs of genuine and innocent people.
An absolute waste.There are very few hardened criminals,including murderers who reform anyway,so as far as employing them,I certainly wouldn't if I was in business. They make themselves unemployable anyway because their method of employment pays far more than any wage would do ! Then they can screw the system because they know how.
Sorry kid,but I've got no time for them at all.They're all as cunning and as crafty as a cartload of monkeys. They're the winners while the innocent bystanders can only look on in bewilderment at the kid-glove treatment that's dished out to these miscreants.
I have little James Bulger's mother in mind,who's suffered years of torture seeing the " care and concern "that those evil beings have undergone and she has to live the rest of her life under their shadow. If ever I felt for someone,it's her and the horrendous murder of that little boy. It still touches me after all these years,which to me was the worst murder in living history,because it was carried out by little boys who'd already mapped out their rotten lives. There's no place in society for them. Even the police officers suffered and still do.
-
Steve,it's an utter insult to the victims that criminals are given new identities then all the fuss and bother of also being given accommodation in different areas. It's this sort of sheer nonsense that is helping toward the draining of resources from the needs of genuine and innocent people.
An absolute waste.There are very few hardened criminals,including murderers who reform anyway,so as far as employing them,I certainly wouldn't if I was in business. They make themselves unemployable anyway because their method of employment pays far more than any wage would do ! Then they can screw the system because they know how.
Sorry kid,but I've got no time for them at all.They're all as cunning and as crafty as a cartload of monkeys. They're the winners while the innocent bystanders can only look on in bewilderment at the kid-glove treatment that's dished out to these miscreants.
I have little James Bulger's mother in mind,who's suffered years of torture seeing the " care and concern "that those evil beings have undergone and she has to live the rest of her life under their shadow. If ever I felt for someone,it's her and the horrendous murder of that little boy. It still touches me after all these years,which to me was the worst murder in living history,because it was carried out by little boys who'd already mapped out their rotten lives. There's no place in society for them. Even the police officers suffered and still do.
I don't know enough about these killers to know whether they can all be tarred with the same brush. I would only say that they are children and I wouldn't like to think their whole future was blighted because of one crime. I don't want to make excuses but wasn't the dad of one of the Bulger killers watching some violent video? The Will Cornick case is more difficult to discern and at 15 he should know the difference between right and wrong. He had asked to drop the subject and the school refused and to my mind it's just not worth the candle to argue. I also feel that extending the school leaving age to 18 will only breed resentment and is another mistake.
-
No. Let it be part of the punishment. A child criminal usually grows up to be an adult one,so let their names be made public in order to trace them in their adult lives should the need arise.
It seems you won't have given any thought to the natural progression of such a punishment. How would such people find employment? Where would they live if they can't earn? Are you suggesting they sleep in gutters or under hedges? Or perhaps you'd sooner see them put back into residential lock-ups for life. They'll actually end up serving longer sentences than their adult counterparts.
-
It seems you won't have given any thought to the natural progression of such a punishment. How would such people find employment? Where would they live if they can't earn? Are you suggesting they sleep in gutters or under hedges? Or perhaps you'd sooner see them put back into residential lock-ups for life. They'll actually end up serving longer sentences than their adult counterparts.
It was also noted that siblings of the perpetrators felt they were stigmatized and lost their privacy as well. I'm sure many do take lookout's view, but it smacks of defeatism if we as a society think we cannot rehabilitate, and as you say times have changed since the full employment days and it would be practically impossible for someone known as a killer to ever get a job.
-
Given that one of the cornerstones of the English legal system is that punishment is about retribution and REHABILITATION then I 100% agree that child criminals should be granted anonymity where necessary.
Taking an extreme example there is no possible way that at the age of 10 years of age Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were 100% beyond any possible form of rehabilitation, therefore of course they should be afforded that opportunity. We live in the 21st century not medieval times.
-
Given that one of the cornerstones of the English legal system is that punishment is about retribution and REHABILITATION then I 100% agree that child criminals should be granted anonymity where necessary.
Taking an extreme example there is no possible way that at the age of 10 years of age Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were 100% beyond any possible form of rehabilitation, therefore of course they should be afforded that opportunity. We live in the 21st century not medieval times.
I agree with the thrust of that but I do sympathize with lookout's view of considering the victims left behind and what signal this is sending out as far as deterrence is concerned. How can you possibly get over the death of a child? Maybe there's a case for restorative justice and I just wonder to what extent the perpetrators of these heinous crimes fully realize what impact their deeds have left on the bereaved. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/james-bulgers-mum-fears-killers-8633392
-
I agree with the thrust of that but I do sympathize with lookout's view of considering the victims left behind and what signal this is sending out as far as deterrence is concerned. How can you possibly get over the death of a child? Maybe there's a case for restorative justice and I just wonder to what extent the perpetrators of these heinous crimes fully realize what impact their deeds have left on the bereaved. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/james-bulgers-mum-fears-killers-8633392
I completely agree that my sympathy lies with the victims families.
But in the example of RT and JV, although the crimes they committed were heinous, in modern society today they simply have to be offered the chance to be rehabilitated. To not do so would be inhumane and would be like a step back towards capital punishment.
In my opinion no psychologist, psychiatrist, child behavioural expert etc could say implicitly that at the age of 10 neither perpetrator had any possible chance of changing in any way or being able to be rehabilitated. Therefore they simply must be given that opportunity.
-
I completely agree that my sympathy lies with the victims families.
But in the example of RT and JV, although the crimes they committed were heinous, in modern society today they simply have to be offered the chance to be rehabilitated. To not do so would be inhumane and would be like a step back towards capital punishment.
In my opinion no psychologist, psychiatrist, child behavioural expert etc could say implicitly that at the age of 10 neither perpetrator had any possible chance of changing in any way or being able to be rehabilitated. Therefore they simply must be given that opportunity.
I agree with the thrust of that but I do sympathize with lookout's view of considering the victims left behind and what signal this is sending out as far as deterrence is concerned. How can you possibly get over the death of a child? Maybe there's a case for restorative justice and I just wonder to what extent the perpetrators of these heinous crimes fully realize what impact their deeds have left on the bereaved. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/james-bulgers-mum-fears-killers-8633392
I entirely agree with you both. There have been moments when I've felt that victims have been overlooked but God forbid that we should have a mindset which leads to the sort of system advocated by Lookout.
-
Denise Bulger would agree with me and that's all that matters as far as her little boy is concerned.
-
How could anyone talk about rehabilitation,etc.etc. for these murderers, when looking at James's picture ?? What if it had been your little boy ?
-
How could anyone talk about rehabilitation,etc.etc. for these murderers, when looking at James's picture ?? What if it had been your little boy ?
That's why emotion has to be taken out of the equation to be judged objectively.
If it was my child then understandably I would be absolutely devastated but I would still stand by the doctrine that punishment is about retribution and rehabilitation so would be open to the perpetrators undergoing some form of rehabilitation.
Are you telling me that in your opinion society should stand aside and let RT and JV get what they deserve as in your opinion 'there is no place for them in society'? Does the fact they are 10 years of age affect your reasoning at all or is it a one cap fits all in relation to how you believe they should be punished and age is irrelevant to your mindset?
To me as a rational person, taking aside your opinions on jb, your views here are deeply deeply concerning.
-
I wouldn't be thinking about anything but retaliation,after the feeling of numbness had worn off. It's human nature for God's sake and 99.9% would think of going after the killer no matter who.
I can't speak for,nor judge those whose thoughts and ideas go towards rehabilitating murderers,the same as I should neither be judged for my way of thinking as we're all allowed free speech,etc.
I would give the thugs the sentence they deserve along with a regime that was practised in Borstal---then tag them for the rest of their lives so that people knew they were murderers. I would make living as uncomfortable as it could be and because of our " nanny state " there'd always be some mug who'd be willing to give them a chance.Would you ? Would you like someone like that living next door or in the same road as you ?
It's alright paying lip service about what you'd do,but when push comes to shove you wouldn't personally help them. How many murderers do you know who've made something of their lives and given back to the country what they took out ?
At least I'm truthful and don't have to dish out excuses like retribution or rehabilitation.
I don't much care for your views either !
-
I wouldn't be thinking about anything but retaliation,after the feeling of numbness had worn off. It's human nature for God's sake and 99.9% would think of going after the killer no matter who.
So then what makes you any different to the killer?
-
So then what makes you any different to the killer?
The fact that I was right and the killer was wrong ! Mercy killings are forgiven,aren't they ?
What do you think I'd do,shake its hand ?
-
I wouldn't be thinking about anything but retaliation,after the feeling of numbness had worn off. It's human nature for God's sake and 99.9% would think of going after the killer no matter who.
I can't speak for,nor judge those whose thoughts and ideas go towards rehabilitating murderers,the same as I should neither be judged for my way of thinking as we're all allowed free speech,etc.
I would give the thugs the sentence they deserve along with a regime that was practised in Borstal---then tag them for the rest of their lives so that people knew they were murderers. I would make living as uncomfortable as it could be and because of our " nanny state " there'd always be some mug who'd be willing to give them a chance.Would you ? Would you like someone like that living next door or in the same road as you ?
It's alright paying lip service about what you'd do,but when push comes to shove you wouldn't personally help them. How many murderers do you know who've made something of their lives and given back to the country what they took out ?
At least I'm truthful and don't have to dish out excuses like retribution or rehabilitation.
I don't much care for your views either !
By dishing out excuses like retribution and rehabilitation I'm not sure what u mean?
Do u think offenders should face retribution? Should they be offered rehabilitation!
How many murderers have made something of their lives?! Do you think they should be given the opportunity to make something of their lives? Or in your world are they destined for the rubbish heap?
You think 99.9% would go after the killers?! I'm not sure u realise how offensive this comment is.
For arguments sake just imagine Robert Thompson has made massive strides forward accepting his guilt and coming to terms with the pain and suffering he has caused to so many people. How would u feel about this?
Would u be happy? Or disappointing noted that 'another murderer got away with it' x
-
What I fail to understand is the fact that you would side with those individuals who'd actually bother with anyone who'd committed such a heinous crime,as to " help " them rehabilitate ? You,and others like you leave me speechless and offended !
Just say for instance that Jeremy had murdered the twins. Would you still feel the same,or would you say what others,including myself if I thought he was guilty, that the man should be left to die in prison ?
I've never heard you mention JB and rehabilitation in the same sentence ? Would it apply to him in your world ?
I don't agree with your way of thinking because I'm on the side of the victims at all times,never the criminals.
-
What I fail to understand is the fact that you would side with those individuals who'd actually bother with anyone who'd committed such a heinous crime,as to " help " them rehabilitate ? You,and others like you leave me speechless and offended !
Just say for instance that Jeremy had murdered the twins. Would you still feel the same,or would you say what others,including myself if I thought he was guilty, that the man should be left to die in prison ?
I've never heard you mention JB and rehabilitation in the same sentence ? Would it apply to him in your world ?
I don't agree with your way of thinking because I'm on the side of the victims at all times,never the criminals.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8025.msg380808.html#msg380808
I made the mistake of doing SH's bidding for him. I wrongly believed he was innocent, ergo others were responsible.
I am hoping others will learn from my mistakes and not do as I once did.
By blaming Jeremy Bamber's relatives, Sheila, the police etc, you are merely repeating my mistakes. You are doing the bidding for a man who should be doing his own bidding.
If Jeremy Bamber is innocent and indeed a decent guy he would not be putting others in the firing line, as SH once did to me and many others.
There are some prisoners, like Jeremy Bamber, deemed far too dangerous to ever be allowed their liberty.
-
What I fail to understand is the fact that you would side with those individuals who'd actually bother with anyone who'd committed such a heinous crime,as to " help " them rehabilitate ? You,and others like you leave me speechless and offended !
Just say for instance that Jeremy had murdered the twins. Would you still feel the same,or would you say what others,including myself if I thought he was guilty, that the man should be left to die in prison ?
I've never heard you mention JB and rehabilitation in the same sentence ? Would it apply to him in your world ?
I don't agree with your way of thinking because I'm on the side of the victims at all times,never the criminals.
It's not about taking sides! Of course my sympathies all lie with the victims. However we live in the 21st century so I believe that offenders should have the opportunity to undergo rehabilitation.
You appear to have a total misconception that rehabilitation means an easy life or they are treated more favourably or have in effect got away with it. This could not be further from the truth.
Given that jb probably murdered 5 people, then yes from his conviction I do think he should have had the opportunity to attempt some form of rehabilitation. However, the problem he faces is it is very very difficult to rehabilitate yourself when you are in denial over the crime you have committed. One of the early stages is an acceptance of guilt and an acceptance of ones actions. If jb had gone through that process from the start then who knows whether he could have been rehabilitated to some degree.
My PhD thesis is actually on whether it is morally and legally acceptable for prisoners to face whole life tariffs like jb has had imposed. On this subject I personally think that whole life tariffs are not morally justifiable and I would argue they are not legally justifiable, but that's a whole new argument!
-
A contradiction of petey's post where he'd said he'd rehabilitate such criminals.
Make up your minds. You either leave them to die or rehabilitate them,which is it to be,as ALL murderers are the same. Why rehabilitate some and not others ?
-
A contradiction of petey's post where he'd said he'd rehabilitate such criminals.
Make up your minds. You either leave them to die or rehabilitate them,which is it to be,as ALL murderers are the same. Why rehabilitate some and not others ?
Not too sure where you think I have contradicted myself.
Do you honestly think that all murderers are the same?! For example would you view someone who helped to kill an elderly relative in terrible pain who wanted to die (this is still murder if you kill them) in the same way as Ian Huntley and Robert Napper?
-
My PhD thesis is actually on whether it is morally and legally acceptable for prisoners to face whole life tariffs like jb has had imposed. On this subject I personally think that whole life tariffs are not morally justifiable and I would argue they are not legally justifiable, but that's a whole new argument!
That's interesting Petey. My thoughts and ideas regarding this change over time. When SH confessed it was quite apparent to me that any form of rehabilitation was possibly going to take him far longer than those prisoners who had not publicly maintained innocence. Though my thoughts at the time were based on someone who wasn't personality disordered.
I believe UK prisons in general are inadequate when it comes to rehabilitation and restorative justice; especially when compared to prisons abroad. Of course staff shortages, cut backs on funding also play a part.
It's suggested that psychopathy wains in/around mid life but I do not believe there has been enough research on the subject matter. And when considering someone like Bamber in relation to release, when, if ever, would his manipulative and deceptiveness decrease? How could we be certain he was no longer a danger to society in general?
I would argue that UK prisons need to come up to the same standard, or indeed better, than the standard set out here with regards mental health & PD's, before any such argument takes place regarding whole life tariffs.
-
That's interesting Petey. My thoughts and ideas regarding this change over time. When SH confessed it was quite apparent to me that any form of rehabilitation was possibly going to take him far longer than those prisoners who had not publicly maintained innocence. Though my thoughts at the time were based on someone who wasn't personality disordered.
I believe UK prisons in general are inadequate when it comes to rehabilitation and restorative justice; especially when compared to prisons abroad. Of course staff shortages, cut backs on funding also play a part.
It's suggested that psychopathy wains in/around mid life but I do not believe there has been enough research on the subject matter. And when considering someone like Bamber in relation to release, when, if ever, would his manipulative and deceptiveness decrease? How could we be certain he was no longer a danger to society in general?
I would argue that UK prisons need to come up to the same standard, or indeed better, than the standard set out here with regards mental health & PD's, before any such argument takes place regarding whole life tariffs.
I would argue that whole life tariffs are not morally or legally justifiable. However, say jb had life sentence with minimum 25 years. This does not mean he will be released after 25 years. He would still have to show the parole board he is fully rehabilitated and safe to return to society after 25 years. In some offenders cases there is no way they will ever meet this threshold so they are in effect prisoners for life. The key thing for me is that every prisoner must have the opportunity. To take that away is a step back towards capital punishment.
-
I would argue that whole life tariffs are not morally or legally justifiable. However, say jb had life sentence with minimum 25 years. This does not mean he will be released after 25 years. He would still have to show the parole board he is fully rehabilitated and safe to return to society after 25 years. In some offenders cases there is no way they will ever meet this threshold so they are in effect prisoners for life. The key thing for me is that every prisoner must have the opportunity. To take that away is a step back towards capital punishment.
If there was no 'life means life' tarrif, would Bamber have realeased after 25 years ? He was still protesting his innocence.
-
Not too sure where you think I have contradicted myself.
Do you honestly think that all murderers are the same?! For example would you view someone who helped to kill an elderly relative in terrible pain who wanted to die (this is still murder if you kill them) in the same way as Ian Huntley and Robert Napper?
Euthanasia is NOT murder.
IF a mercy killing in a case where great suffering is witnessed and that which can be proved that it WAS,i.e. with a doctor/ health professional,along with the history of that patient, as witnesses,then to me that is NOT classed as murder,but an ethical and humane way of ending the suffering.
Morphine medication is increased in most cases.
Even those who are looking after loved ones at home,without a doctor being present,and who end the life of the one they're looking after should never be classed as a murderer where there is just cause that a person's quality of life was impeded in such a way as to never regain their health again.
Again,we have the other type of killing where a physically and mentally abused woman over time,snaps and kills her abuser. That again is a forgivable act and one which shouldn't carry a prison sentence because the abuser was at fault. This kind of abuse,to me,is horrendous as the woman has already suffered her sentence by being housebound because of her image. The right one died in my eyes.
I would NEVER put these poor souls in the same category as those who you've named.That was a ridiculous comparison of which surprises me but gives me an insight into your character.
-
I would argue that whole life tariffs are not morally or legally justifiable. However, say jb had life sentence with minimum 25 years. This does not mean he will be released after 25 years. He would still have to show the parole board he is fully rehabilitated and safe to return to society after 25 years. In some offenders cases there is no way they will ever meet this threshold so they are in effect prisoners for life. The key thing for me is that every prisoner must have the opportunity. To take that away is a step back towards capital punishment.
I do agree with you to a point. However, my concerns remain with regards the inadequacies I've witnessed, for example with regards prison staff in general and their lack of understanding in relation to each prisoner in their care.
Before any argument takes place, personally I think there are more important issues that need addressing within our prisons. Plus whole life tariffs in this country are not high.
And whilst we have whole life tariffs could these not be seen to be a deterrent for other prisoners wishing to take the same path Jeremy Bamber has chosen?
-
Getting back to my previous question.Would you rehabilitate JB IF he was a murderer,though in your eyes he is,so the question has more relevance.
-
Euthanasia is NOT murder.
IF a mercy killing in a case where great suffering is witnessed and that which can be proved that it WAS,i.e. with a doctor/ health professional,along with the history of that patient, as witnesses,then to me that is NOT classed as murder,but an ethical and humane way of ending the suffering.
Morphine medication is increased in most cases.
Even those who are looking after loved ones at home,without a doctor being present,and who end the life of the one they're looking after should never be classed as a murderer where there is just cause that a person's quality of life was impeded in such a way as to never regain their health again.
Again,we have the other type of killing where a physically and mentally abused woman over time,snaps and kills her abuser. That again is a forgivable act and one which shouldn't carry a prison sentence because the abuser was at fault. This kind of abuse,to me,is horrendous as the woman has already suffered her sentence by being housebound because of her image. The right one died in my eyes.
I would NEVER put these poor souls in the same category as those who you've named.That was a ridiculous comparison of which surprises me but gives me an insight into your character.
If you read your previous post you quoted that all murderers are the same. I was merely pointing out what a ridiculous assertion that was.
Are you aware that euthanasia in the UK is illegal and is classed as murder or manslaughter?
For you then to argue that abused women are quite within their rights to kill their partner is quite staggering.
What kind of society do you think we live in?!!!!!!
-
If there wasno 'life means life' tarrif, would Bamber have realeased after 25 years ? He was still protesting his innocence.
Prior to Jeremy's whole life tariff, he would have known that whilst he remained in denial his chances of parole would have been slim.
Though SH managed to get to open conditions without having admitted guilt and was on target in terms of sentence planning/parole board. Until his lack of self control/poor coping skills were recognised in 2013.
I remain convinced the prison authorities know things about Jeremy Bamber that aren't in the public domain. Are the prison also aware of Jeremy's lack of self control/poor coping skills and is it because of factors like this that he is deemed so dangerous?
-
Getting back to my previous question.Would you rehabilitate JB IF he was a murderer,though in your eyes he is,so the question has more relevance.
If you read my replies I answered this in post 20!
-
Prior to Jeremy's whole life tariff, he would have known that whilst he remained in denial his chances of parole would have been slim.
Though SH managed to get to open conditions without having admitted guilt and was on target in terms of the parole board. Until his poor self control was recognised in 2013.
I remain convinced the prison authorities know things about Jeremy Bamber that aren't in the public domain. Are the prison also aware of Jeremy's poor self control and is it because of factors like this that he is deemed so dangerous?
Mark Chapman was given 20 years in 1980. He has been refused parole several times since 2000. Although he has never denied his guilt and shown some remorse. People say he would be in danger in society, but couldn't he be given a new identity ?
If the 'Life means life' tarriff had not come in, I suspect Bamber would have fought for release until a couple of years before a possible parole. Then admitted his guilt as he knew it was so only way he would get released.
-
Mark Chapman was given 20 years in 1980. He has been refused parole several times since 2000. Although he has never denied his guilt and shown some remorse. People say he would be in danger in society, but couldn't he be given a new identity ?
If the 'Life means life' tarriff had not come in, I suspect Bamber would have fought for release until a couple of years before a possible parole. Then admitted his guilt as he knew it was so only way he would get released.
I've edited my post above Adam as I'd made a mistake.
By having a new identity you mean he would be less like to be at risk from others. What about his risk to others and himself?
-
I've edited my post above Adam as I'd made a mistake.
By having a new identity you mean he would be less like to be at risk from others. What about his risk to others and himself?
It's up to the parole board if they believe Chapman would be a danger to other people. If released.
The impression I get is he isn't being released because the public would come after him. In that case, a new identity would solve that.
-
It's up to the parole board if they believe Chapman would be a danger to other people. If released.
The impression I get is he isn't being released because the public would come after him. In that case, a new identity would solve that.
Again, it's quite possible the prison have knowledge of his personality that deem him a risk to the public, as opposed to the public being a risk to him.
Some personality disordered individuals crave attention. Therefore maybe Chapman, even if given a new identity, would blow it too soon because of his need for attention from others? Who knows Adam?
I've recogised many disordered individuals appear to lack self control, therefore at some point their true colours come to the fore.
-
If you read your previous post you quoted that all murderers are the same. I was merely pointing out what a ridiculous assertion that was.
Are you aware that euthanasia in the UK is illegal and is classed as murder or manslaughter?
For you then to argue that abused women are quite within their rights to kill their partner is quite staggering.
What kind of society do you think we live in?!!!!!!
A society where those who'd intended murder are released after serving half or less of their sentence only to commit crime again !!!!!!!
I did NOT say that it was the right of an abused woman to kill her partner------read it again!!
Because the relatives have got it into their heads that JB is the killer,THEY won't ever hear of his release. THEY were responsible for giving him the " death sentence " that he's got by disallowing a lower category in his sentencing. THESE people think the same as I do so far as punishment for murder goes,so what are your thoughts on that ?? No rehabilitation,but a life-time spent behind bars until death.
Or does that only apply to me where you think I'm heartless and all the rest of it ?
-
Because the relatives have got it into their heads that JB is the killer,
They aren't alone Lookout!
Even Jeremy's birth father has publicly stated he believes him to be a psychopath.
-
A society where those who'd intended murder are released after serving half or less of their sentence only to commit crime again !!!!!!!
I did NOT say that it was the right of an abused woman to kill her partner------read it again!!
Because the relatives have got it into their heads that JB is the killer,THEY won't ever hear of his release. THEY were responsible for giving him the " death sentence " that he's got by disallowing a lower category in his sentencing. THESE people think the same as I do so far as punishment for murder goes,so what are your thoughts on that ?? No rehabilitation,but a life-time spent behind bars until death.
Or does that only apply to me where you think I'm heartless and all the rest of it ?
Well you said if they did then its a forgivable act, which shouldn't be punished by imprisonment and the right person would have died! That is akin to giving an abused partner carte blanche to behave as they wish as their behaviour is justified in your eyes. Still a very worrying statement in modern society.
I'm sure you are aware that jb was convicted in a criminal court, had his appeal rejected by the Court of Appeal, submissions rejected by CCRC and had his sentence set by a judge and whole life tariff set by the Home Secretary. NOT the relatives!
As I've repeatedly said, I believe all offenders should be offered the chance of rehabilitation, although obviously this will not work for some and some do not want to be rehabilitated.
-
What I fail to understand is the fact that you would side with those individuals who'd actually bother with anyone who'd committed such a heinous crime,as to " help " them rehabilitate ? You,and others like you leave me speechless and offended !
Just say for instance that Jeremy had murdered the twins. Would you still feel the same,or would you say what others,including myself if I thought he was guilty, that the man should be left to die in prison ?
I've never heard you mention JB and rehabilitation in the same sentence ? Would it apply to him in your world ?
I don't agree with your way of thinking because I'm on the side of the victims at all times,never the criminals.
So in your world, it's OK to hate killers and yet on the JB board you condemn those who believe that Jeremy is guilty simply for saying he's guilty. You admit you would want him to die in prison if guilty but condemn those who think he is guilty and refer to him in those terms. Bit hypocritical!
Jeremy can't be rehabilitated until he accepts responsibility for what he did and owns up to it.
-
Well you said if they did then its a forgivable act, which shouldn't be punished by imprisonment and the right person would have died! That is akin to giving an abused partner carte blanche to behave as they wish as their behaviour is justified in your eyes. Still a very worrying statement in modern society.
I'm sure you are aware that jb was convicted in a criminal court, had his appeal rejected by the Court of Appeal, submissions rejected by CCRC and had his sentence set by a judge and whole life tariff set by the Home Secretary. NOT the relatives!
As I've repeatedly said, I believe all offenders should be offered the chance of rehabilitation, although obviously this will not work for some and some do not want to be rehabilitated.
But there wasn't any consistency in their approach Petey and whilst agreeing with the thrust of your argument that on balance children should be marked out as children and given a further chance I can't help but feel that those politicians who suspended and then finally abolished the death penalty in 1965 had a short-term agenda which was unable to acknowledge the problems which would arise in a case such as Bamber, where this individual is stuck behind bars in perpetuity without any thought for the issues which might arise therefrom.
-
They aren't alone Lookout!
Even Jeremy's birth father has publicly stated he believes him to be a psychopath.
How could he possibly know?
-
How could he possibly know?
Maybe it ran in the family?
-
I wouldn't be thinking about anything but retaliation,after the feeling of numbness had worn off. It's human nature for God's sake and 99.9% would think of going after the killer no matter who.
I can't speak for,nor judge those whose thoughts and ideas go towards rehabilitating murderers,the same as I should neither be judged for my way of thinking as we're all allowed free speech,etc.
I would give the thugs the sentence they deserve along with a regime that was practised in Borstal---then tag them for the rest of their lives so that people knew they were murderers. I would make living as uncomfortable as it could be and because of our " nanny state " there'd always be some mug who'd be willing to give them a chance.Would you ? Would you like someone like that living next door or in the same road as you ?
It's alright paying lip service about what you'd do,but when push comes to shove you wouldn't personally help them. How many murderers do you know who've made something of their lives and given back to the country what they took out ?
At least I'm truthful and don't have to dish out excuses like retribution or rehabilitation.
I don't much care for your views either !
It seems to me that there might be a lot of internalized anger behind those words and all I can say to that is God help us all if ever a political party comes to power who supports your mindset. It would spread outwards and downwards like a cancer. Chaos, anarchy and disorder would rule. If you believe there's family breakdown now, under your new order it would be a damn sight worse. Neighbours would be spying/telling tales on neighbours to cover up their own wrong doings. Whole communities would break down. There'd be civil war. Chances are it would end up with those being "taken out" who promoted the idea of such unspeakable mass barbarity. Puts me in mind of small town parochial America and the Ku Klux Clan or Hitler's thugs.
-
Prior to Jeremy's whole life tariff, he would have known that whilst he remained in denial his chances of parole would have been slim.
Though SH managed to get to open conditions without having admitted guilt and was on target in terms of sentence planning/parole board. Until his lack of self control/poor coping skills were recognised in 2013.
I remain convinced the prison authorities know things about Jeremy Bamber that aren't in the public domain. Are the prison also aware of Jeremy's lack of self control/poor coping skills and is it because of factors like this that he is deemed so dangerous?
Steph, it really doesn't surprise me that information about prisoners serving sentences is withheld from the general public. There are VERY few (of us) who have the need/right to know.
-
So in your world, it's OK to hate killers and yet on the JB board you condemn those who believe that Jeremy is guilty simply for saying he's guilty. You admit you would want him to die in prison if guilty but condemn those who think he is guilty and refer to him in those terms. Bit hypocritical!
Jeremy can't be rehabilitated until he accepts responsibility for what he did and owns up to it.
Not hypocritical,just let's wait and see what these latest forensic tests throw up one way or the other.
Because I'm sure that he's innocent and by some quirk it ends up that he isn't,then I wouldn't lose sleep over his fate.
This has been the oddest of cases in that 30 years have passed and there has remained to be doubt over his conviction,something which I can't be hypocritical about because where there's uncertainty you can't say yea or nay,except in my case it's a definite nay,and yours a yea,so I can't understand your remark about hypocrisy.
If there'd been no doubt whatsoever and ALL tests had reached that conclusion,then it would have been a yea from me.
Take Death Row in the States. How many have served 20,30,40 years only to have been found innocent ? The very mention of Death Row leads EVERYONE to believe that it's where those who committed heinous crimes should remain,but there are always that small % who didn't and if in doubt,investigate every avenue until you're satisfied that the outcome will be the right one before they're put to death.
I couldn't care less when the right ones ( offenders ) receive their comeuppance----------they won't murder again that's for sure,but for God's sake get it right the first time. That applies to this country too.
-
If it was that JB WAS to have been found guilty,I'd look upon it the same as other murderers,STOP wasting MY money ( taxpayers ) on rehabilitating something that's impossible to mold into a human being. Once a killer always a killer because their brains are different to ours.
-
Steph, it really doesn't surprise me that information about prisoners serving sentences is withheld from the general public. There are VERY few (of us) who have the need/right to know.
But of course it would help, especially in cases like this, if we knew.
And of course the same can be said about disclosure, as I posted earlier. It's the responsibility of organisations like the CCRC, the CPS etc to protect the victims first and foremost. There's no reason a serving prisoner should be given access to certain documents/photographs. Though I argued against this a few years back.
I now recognise that in cases like Bambers (And indeed SH) especially where it is stated, neither of them have mental health issues or personality disorders, they would have been advised they could have requested disclosure if they believed said disclosure would support their claims, pre-trial.
The reasons for not requesting the documents at the time are obvious. It wasn't through naivety or not knowing what they were charged with and not understanding the crime etc. It was because they knew they were guilty.
-
Not hypocritical,just let's wait and see what these latest forensic tests throw up one way or the other.
Because I'm sure that he's innocent and by some quirk it ends up that he isn't,then I wouldn't lose sleep over his fate.
This has been the oddest of cases in that 30 years have passed and there has remained to be doubt over his conviction,something which I can't be hypocritical about because where there's uncertainty you can't say yea or nay,except in my case it's a definite nay,and yours a yea,so I can't understand your remark about hypocrisy.
Until the CT get the basic facts right Lookout, they won't be taken seriously. Or they will be taken seriously only for the forensic expert to do some research themselves and learn the CT have given them mis-information.
And lets not forget the CCRC and Courts already have the facts so they will, as Caroline stated, most probably just roll their eyes...
-
If it was that JB WAS to have been found guilty,I'd look upon it the same as other murderers,STOP wasting MY money ( taxpayers ) on rehabilitating something that's impossible to mold into a human being. Once a killer always a killer because their brains are different to ours.
Quite an unbelievable statement.
Surely, surely you don't believe what you have just posted?! If you do I suggest you re-educate yourself.
Do you honestly honestly think that every single person who has ever killed anybody has 'a different brain' ?!
In your world do pre- sentencing reports, contrition, admissions of guilt and attempts at rehabilitation etc etc mean absolutely nothing to you as 'once a killer, always a killer'
Out of interest given that RT and JV were convicted at the age of 11 what do you think their punishment should have been? Should they still remain in prison as once a killer, always a killer? Would you have sentenced them to death? Or what do you think should have been their punishment?
-
Quite an unbelievable statement.
Surely, surely you don't believe what you have just posted?! If you do I suggest you re-educate yourself.
Do you honestly honestly think that every single person who has ever killed anybody has 'a different brain' ?!
In your world do pre- sentencing reports, contrition, admissions of guilt and attempts at rehabilitation etc etc mean absolutely nothing to you as 'once a killer, always a killer'
Out of interest given that RT and JV were convicted at the age of 11 what do you think their punishment should have been? Should they still remain in prison as once a killer, always a killer? Would you have sentenced them to death? Or what do you think should have been their punishment?
One of those ghastly characters has offended more than once since release which proves my point. I don't doubt that he hasn't been the only one who's re-offended.
I'd have left them to rot,yes.
Just because my views differ from yours,there's no need for insults ! I suppose you're to be pitied,knowing no different than to insult and so long as they're fired at me it's alright. Go on,be a big boy and argue with your own sort and not a 77 year old !! Kindly sod off.
-
One of those ghastly characters has offended more than once since release which proves my point. I don't doubt that he hasn't been the only one who's re-offended.
I'd have left them to rot,yes.
Just because my views differ from yours,there's no need for insults ! I suppose you're to be pitied,knowing no different than to insult and so long as they're fired at me it's alright. Go on,be a big boy and argue with your own sort and not a 77 year old !! Kindly sod off.
I'm merely staggered at your viewpoint. Even more so when you quite openly state that an offender who murdered someone at the age of 10, should still remain in prison some 23 years after they were sentenced.
Remember they were still children themselves at age 10 when they committed the crime. Yet that's irrelevant to you and you would allow them to 'rot in jail'. Quite unbelievable and I pity your viewpoint.
-
One of those ghastly characters has offended more than once since release which proves my point. I don't doubt that he hasn't been the only one who's re-offended.
I'd have left them to rot,yes.
Just because my views differ from yours,there's no need for insults ! I suppose you're to be pitied,knowing no different than to insult and so long as they're fired at me it's alright. Go on,be a big boy and argue with your own sort and not a 77 year old !! Kindly sod off.
CHILDREN!!!!!!! You'd have left then to rot!!! Who bought -DRAGGED- those children up, Lookout? I agree that what they did was horrendous. I hold my hands up and freely admit to not knowing what is the right answer but I'm sure that your lack of compassion is almost as bad.................and YOU'RE old enough to know better.
-
CHILDREN!!!!!!! You'd have left then to rot!!! Who bought -DRAGGED- those children up, Lookout? I agree that what they did was horrendous. I hold my hands up and freely admit to not knowing what is the right answer but I'm sure that your lack of compassion is almost as bad.................and YOU'RE old enough to know better.
Oh,please ! Get off your high horse Jane. I suppose I have to thank the Lord that I didn't bear such a child,for as you must remember the time when I said I'd have turned my back on such a monster and duly disowned it.
I show NO compassion for/towards those who hurt/harm others. Why should I just to please you and the other do-gooders ?
-
Oh,please ! Get off your high horse Jane. I suppose I have to thank the Lord that I didn't bear such a child,for as you must remember the time when I said I'd have turned my back on such a monster and duly disowned it.
I show NO compassion for/towards those who hurt/harm others. Why should I just to please you and the other do-gooders ?
I know how it is to be bought up by someone for whom life was either black or white/one strike and you're out. It wasn't just about those who hurt/harmed others, which comes in many guises and takes forms according to how the individual sees it as being -although arguably she COULD have denied herself compassion for how she treated me except, that rather like you, she believed she was right- her black/white belief carried on through every aspect of her life and everyone -especially me- who disagreed with her was wrong. If I turned out to be a "do-gooder" it was as a direct response to the spitefulness I witnessed emanating from her. I think your thanking God, for not bearing a child from whom you could so readily switch off feelings as if they were light switches, might be a plan. For most, the pain would be intolerable. Some would simply take comfort from the knowledge that they believe themselves to be right and therefore justified.
-
I know how it is to be bought up by someone for whom life was either black or white/one strike and you're out. It wasn't just about those who hurt/harmed others, which comes in many guises and takes forms according to how the individual sees it as being -although arguably she COULD have denied herself compassion for how she treated me except, that rather like you, she believed she was right- her black/white belief carried on through every aspect of her life and everyone -especially me- who disagreed with her was wrong. If I turned out to be a "do-gooder" it was as a direct response to the spitefulness I witnessed emanating from her. I think your thanking God, for not bearing a child from whom you could so readily switch off feelings as if they were light switches, might be a plan. For most, the pain would be intolerable. Some would simply take comfort from the knowledge that they believe themselves to be right and therefore justified.
So how would you deal with a son who'd murdered or bashed some old person beyond recognition ?
-
Violence toward vulnerable,defenceless people/children is totally unacceptable and should be dealt with harshly,not offered all sorts of treatments,etc.
I've witnessed heartbreaking scenes of both and this is why I take on this attitude towards the monsters, who immediately forfeit their " rights " by committing such crimes.
You probably just see pictures in the media or on television,perhaps if you saw the real thing/horrendous damage physically and mentally,you MIGHT just change your mind,but only might,judging by your attitude.
-
So how would you deal with a son who'd murdered or bashed some old person beyond recognition ?
They should be punished by the criminal courts by a mandatory life sentence. Then depending on the particular crime they would be eligible for parole after x years.
I would then hope that a) they showed remorse for their actions and b) they were offered the support and rehabilitation they needed, within the penal system.
One thing I certainly would not do is completely abandon them or turn my back on a family member. I would be appalled by their actions and my sympathies of course would lie with the victims. But I would be as supportive as I could and never turn my back on a family member. I would know that they needed help so hope that they could start the long process of rehabilitation and both come to terms with and accept the crime they had committed.
-
Violence toward vulnerable,defenceless people/children is totally unacceptable and should be dealt with harshly,not offered all sorts of treatments,etc.
I've witnessed heartbreaking scenes of both and this is why I take on this attitude towards the monsters, who immediately forfeit their " rights " by committing such crimes.
You probably just see pictures in the media or on television,perhaps if you saw the real thing/horrendous damage physically and mentally,you MIGHT just change your mind,but only might,judging by your attitude.
Your attitude belongs in medieval times. Try to remember that we live in the 21st century now and things have moved on.
-
So how would you deal with a son who'd murdered or bashed some old person beyond recognition ?
Lookout, as I've already admitted to not knowing what the answer is, the same applies to this situation. I would FEEL heartbroken/ashamed/disappointed. I would wonder where I might have gone wrong. I would HATE the crime..................but never, in a million years can I imagine hating my child OR totally turning my back on him.
-
Your attitude belongs in medieval times. Try to remember that we live in the 21st century now and things have moved on.
Unfortunately Petey some people are more concerned with keeping up appearances etc.
-
Just think about " compassion " and the untold damage being " compassionate " has done !!
-
The problem is striking a balance between having it too cushy in one of these units, where Thompson by all accounts knew his rights and ordered staff around, and preparing them for the world outside, which has become an ever-increasing jungle since the 1960s, where you could change your job at the drop of a hat. Nobody does seem to care anymore and Venables has gone off the rails, though one wonders if it's too cynical to judge success by saying that at least they haven't murdered again so far. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/7908605/Prison-is-what-Jon-Venables-knows-best.html
-
Unfortunately Petey some people are more concerned with keeping up appearances etc.
What on earth has this subject got to do with appearances ?
-
Just think about " compassion " and the untold damage being " compassionate " has done !!
You appear to come from a position of believing most of the world -and we who inhabit it- as being bad or just plain evil. In an imperfect world compassion WILL be abused. It will be thrown back in the faces of those who offer it but I don't see that as a reason for withholding it from those who may benefit from it by turning their lives around.
-
Getting back to my previous question.Would you rehabilitate JB IF he was a murderer,though in your eyes he is,so the question has more relevance.
Double standards?
Guilt by assossiation.
-
Double standards?
Guilt by assossiation.
Double standards what ?
Guilt by association what ?
-
Getting back to my previous question.Would you rehabilitate JB IF he was a murderer,though in your eyes he is,so the question has more relevance.
Lookout, rehabilitation can't be forced on people and certainly can't be given to those who have never admitted their guilt, so presumably don't want it. As Jeremy falls in this category, I imagine this applies to him.
-
You appear to come from a position of believing most of the world -and we who inhabit it- as being bad or just plain evil. In an imperfect world compassion WILL be abused. It will be thrown back in the faces of those who offer it but I don't see that as a reason for withholding it from those who may benefit from it by turning their lives around.
Yes,because I was born in an entirely different era when the law-makers acted upon crime as it happened. They were tough, and hard times financially,but------the world's BEST NHS and the BEST education. What went wrong ?
People would do well to be told how this country used to be.
I went on a site the other night,just reading the different posts,and it happened to have been within the area where I was born with loads of people who I'd known 60 years ago and they were all of the same idea about the changes that have taken place over the years. Most of us had attended the same school,worked at the same hospital and lived within yards of each other.
What I noticed from many was the freedom we had while growing up when we were all allowed to play in the local woods without fear of anything sinister happening. What went wrong ?
-
Steve,perhaps you can explain,for instance,how teaching has changed over the years and why is it so tough today than it was in my day. What's gone wrong do you think ?
-
Steve,perhaps you can explain,for instance,how teaching has changed over the years and why is it so tough today than it was in my day. What's gone wrong do you think ?
Well it was going to pot when I joined. It's a very difficult thing to pinpoint but the steep rise in unemployment in the 1980s meant that qualifications were becoming evermore important in a society where many unskilled jobs were disappearing to the Far East. Pupils at school who had elder siblings on the dole were particularly hard to motivate, then we had the dumbing down of the curriculum with the new GCSE which gave prizes to everyone in many cases with very little reward, whilst those at the top got easily bored. The wages failed to keep up with expectations so it took Mum to go out to work and some children lost the linchpin of the family, especially with Sunday working, where there was no longer that special day a family could relax and spend together.
Add the widespread availability of drugs, which was not so prevalent in the 1960s, which some young people took to escape from the insecurity of their lives, the teachers strike under Keith Joseph and of course the abolition of corporal punishment in schools to be replaced by nothing, until Tony Blair made detention a legal sanction in 1997. What a pity he became embroiled in the Iraq war, another manifestation of violence and the "might is right" culture.
You can say what you like about Lookout's philosophy but at least people knew where they stood, and people did care in their own way even when corporal punishment was used, as it was on occasion on Jeremy Bamber. Now it's always someone else's problem, family breakdown is common and single parents who are often children themselves, the estates have become depositories of drugs and anti-social behaviour(just look at the problems dumped on Blackpool in bed and breakfasts), there's self-harm and suicides and under this climate is it any wonder education is no longer valued by a small but vocal minority too many of whom demand their rights but never face their responsibilities?
-
Yes,because I was born in an entirely different era when the law-makers acted upon crime as it happened. They were tough, and hard times financially,but------the world's BEST NHS and the BEST education. What went wrong ?
People would do well to be told how this country used to be.
I went on a site the other night,just reading the different posts,and it happened to have been within the area where I was born with loads of people who I'd known 60 years ago and they were all of the same idea about the changes that have taken place over the years. Most of us had attended the same school,worked at the same hospital and lived within yards of each other.
What I noticed from many was the freedom we had while growing up when we were all allowed to play in the local woods without fear of anything sinister happening. What went wrong ?
Well Lookout, I guess the first thing is that you got older. The second is that the world has moved on. You -and your generation- MAY mourn the passing of the 'good old days' but today's young don't know any different. They have no frame of reference. At some point, post WW2, the country learned it could have more and as a result, expectations became higher. We gave our children to believe that whatever they wanted was available. Our values changed. We gave our children different values because we wanted them to experience the sort of "plenty" that we hadn't. They don't know how much has been sacrificed. How much they've lost. As they've never had it, perhaps they don't miss it.
-
Well it was going to pot when I joined. It's a very difficult thing to pinpoint but the steep rise in unemployment in the 1980s meant that qualifications were becoming evermore important in a society where many unskilled jobs were disappearing to the Far East. Pupils at school who had elder siblings on the dole were particularly hard to motivate, then we had the dumbing down of the curriculum with the new GCSE which gave prizes to everyone in many cases with very little reward, whilst those at the top got easily bored. The wages failed to keep up with expectations so it took Mum to go out to work and some children lost the linchpin of the family, especially with Sunday working, where there was no longer that special day a family could relax and spend together.
Add the widespread availability of drugs, which was not so prevalent in the 1960s, which some young people took to escape from the insecurity of their lives, the teachers strike under Keith Joseph and of course the abolition of corporal punishment in schools to be replaced by nothing, until Tony Blair made detention a legal sanction in 1997. What a pity he became embroiled in the Iraq war, another manifestation of violence and the "might is right" culture.
You can say what you like about Lookout's philosophy but at least people knew where they stood, and people did care in their own way even when corporal punishment was used, as it was on occasion on Jeremy Bamber. Now it's always someone else's problem, family breakdown is common and single parents who are often children themselves, the estates have become depositories of drugs and anti-social behaviour(just look at the problems dumped on Blackpool in bed and breakfasts), there's self-harm and suicides and under this climate is it any wonder education is no longer valued by a small but vocal minority too many of whom demand their rights but never face their responsibilities?
Thankyou for that Steve,brilliantly put. What can I say,except that you're right in many ways.
The reason why I've ended up like a " Victor Meldrew " character.
-
Yes,because I was born in an entirely different era when the law-makers acted upon crime as it happened. They were tough, and hard times financially,but------the world's BEST NHS and the BEST education. What went wrong ?
People would do well to be told how this country used to be.
I went on a site the other night,just reading the different posts,and it happened to have been within the area where I was born with loads of people who I'd known 60 years ago and they were all of the same idea about the changes that have taken place over the years. Most of us had attended the same school,worked at the same hospital and lived within yards of each other.
What I noticed from many was the freedom we had while growing up when we were all allowed to play in the local woods without fear of anything sinister happening. What went wrong ?
Too right Lookout, I tell my grandchildren that I would play all day in the local wood from 10/11 years of age.
-
Too right Lookout, I tell my grandchildren that I would play all day in the local wood from 10/11 years of age.
We as kids had no fear or worries and neither did our parents because they knew we'd all be home safe and sound,mucky,but safe. Even did fishing,but nobody drowned or got into trouble,we just all played happily together until nearly dusk,as you were never aware of the time.
The sad part is that todays youngsters don't and won't have such a glorious past to look back on.
-
We as kids had no fear or worries and neither did our parents because they knew we'd all be home safe and sound,mucky,but safe. Even did fishing,but nobody drowned or got into trouble,we just all played happily together until nearly dusk,as you were never aware of the time.
The sad part is that todays youngsters don't and won't have such a glorious past to look back on.
..and then they wonder why society has a problem with obese children.
-
This recommendation follows a report by Charles Taylor from the National College of Teaching, commissioned by former Education Secretary Michael Gove. Currently any child appearing in a youth court is granted anonymity, but in the Crown Court Social Services must apply for a reporting restriction and reapply when the offended reaches 18 years of age.
Advocates of the policy say that anonymity would give the offenders a chance to reintegrate into society and make them less likely to reoffend. Those against say that the public has a right to know, and that naming and shaming acts as a deterrent to other would-be miscreants.
An example of complete anonymity is the Erdlington Two, brothers who tortured two other boys when they were ten and almost killed them. The offenders are now 18 and 19 and have been granted lifelong anonymity. However Will Cornick, who was 15 when he stabbed to death teacher Ann Maguire in 2014 was named in the Press after the judge lifted reporting restrictions in the public interest.
An example in todays Liverpool Echo increases my argument. A homeless man and his dog,sitting on the pavement minding their own business and a gang of youths came along and bashed seven bells out of him.A vicious attack which left the man bleeding,shaking and crying. Absolutely heartbreaking !
No names were given to the cowardly offenders,which is more the pity because their actions towards a vulnerable person could well be bestowed on another vulnerable person. If names had been published,then the public would be aware of those whose sickening attacks would rightly deserve the same treatment in return if tracked down. Also,they " might " be less likely to carry on their " spree " if they thought they were going to be hunted down.
-
An example in todays Liverpool Echo increases my argument. A homeless man and his dog,sitting on the pavement minding their own business and a gang of youths came along and bashed seven bells out of him.A vicious attack which left the man bleeding,shaking and crying. Absolutely heartbreaking !
No names were given to the cowardly offenders,which is more the pity because their actions towards a vulnerable person could well be bestowed on another vulnerable person. If names had been published,then the public would be aware of those whose sickening attacks would rightly deserve the same treatment in return if tracked down. Also,they " might " be less likely to carry on their " spree " if they thought they were going to be hunted down.
So you up hold vigilante rule? Can you be absolutely certain that all of their number would true, honest and law abiding citizens.....................or is there the possibility that they might be thugs looking for an excuse to carry out their thuggery and have the law behind them?
-
Imo most child criminals are victims of abuse, the wheel of abuse and disorder moves from generation to generation unless it is broken either by social care or by a more enlightened offspring who is able to understand the abuse they suffered should not be continued on the next generation.
Children are generally innocent beings who flourish with love and care but obviously can become disordered and brutal if that is what they are taught by abusive and neglectful carers.
Our society should be caring much more for the children, the prisons are full of abused and disordered people who have never known what security, love and unconditional love is, who are so damaged before the age of 2 or 3 that they have no idea how else to behave than with distrust. hate and anger, imo we should be ashamed of this situation in what is a rich and supposedly christian country.
-
Imo most child criminals are victims of abuse, the wheel of abuse and disorder moves from generation to generation unless it is broken either by social care or by a more enlightened offspring who is able to understand the abuse they suffered should not be continued on the next generation.
Children are generally innocent beings who flourish with love and care but obviously can become disordered and brutal if that is what they are taught by abusive and neglectful carers.
Our society should be caring much more for the children, the prisons are full of abused and disordered people who have never known what security, love and unconditional love is, who are so damaged before the age of 2 or 3 that they have no idea how else to behave than with distrust. hate and anger, imo we should be ashamed of this situation in what is a rich and supposedly christian country.
Speaking generally, I concur 100%. In particular? There will always be some who don't follow the rule. Adults have the power that children don't have which is why I find SO unacceptable Lookout's belief that children should have to suffer for, what is probably, abuse heaped on them by the adults in their lives.
-
So you up hold vigilante rule? Can you be absolutely certain that all of their number would true, honest and law abiding citizens.....................or is there the possibility that they might be thugs looking for an excuse to carry out their thuggery and have the law behind them?
This attack was an out an out act of thuggery on a man who was already seated for a start. It was an entirely unprovoked attack for whatever reason only the thugs would know.I say thugs because there were more than one ( isn't that brave ? ),New Years Eve at 9.30pm and they just went over to the man and started kicking him in the face.
What sort of a person would even think of carrying out such an attack ? The sort of person who laughs in the face of the law,so yes,a good pasting for each one of them,but unfortunately they will have escaped the law anyway.
Are you saying that the law goes along with this type of random thuggery ? Do you need an excuse to bash someone's face in ?
As we know,there are a lot of ex-servicemen on the streets through no fault of their own. What if this man was one of them because it doesn't say who he is only that a charity ran to his help and someone took him in temporarily.
This is Liverpool which thankfully is reknowned for helping such people and there's been a flood of volunteers all offering their help,including mental health nurses giving their time for free.
-
Speaking generally, I concur 100%. In particular? There will always be some who don't follow the rule. Adults have the power that children don't have which is why I find SO unacceptable Lookout's belief that children should have to suffer for, what is probably, abuse heaped on them by the adults in their lives.
If children were brought up properly in the first place then there'd be little or no need for anyone to be left picking up the pieces,least of all the tax-payer if they end up in prison. Bung the parents in prison with them too for not caring.
-
This attack was an out an out act of thuggery on a man who was already seated for a start. It was an entirely unprovoked attack for whatever reason only the thugs would know.I say thugs because there were more than one ( isn't that brave ? ),New Years Eve at 9.30pm and they just went over to the man and started kicking him in the face.
What sort of a person would even think of carrying out such an attack ? The sort of person who laughs in the face of the law,so yes,a good pasting for each one of them,but unfortunately they will have escaped the law anyway.
Are you saying that the law goes along with this type of random thuggery ? Do you need an excuse to bash someone's face in ?
As we know,there are a lot of ex-servicemen on the streets through no fault of their own. What if this man was one of them because it doesn't say who he is only that a charity ran to his help and someone took him in temporarily.
This is Liverpool which thankfully is reknowned for helping such people and there's been a flood of volunteers all offering their help,including mental health nurses giving their time for free.
I think you understand very well what is my position on this. I ABHOR violence -as I believe, does the law- and INCLUDES retaliatory violence, which it sounds as if you condone, if not encourage. I don't go down the "eye for an eye" route but I do look for something stronger, by way of punishment, than "turn the other cheek".
-
If children were brought up properly in the first place then there'd be little or no need for anyone to be left picking up the pieces,least of all the tax-payer if they end up in prison. Bung the parents in prison with them too for not caring.
But we don't live in a perfect world, Lookout, nor are we likely to if we go down the vigilante route. Patterns repeat. The damage inflicted on children by parents, in all likelihood, was inflicted on those parents by THEIR parents.
-
But we don't live in a perfect world, Lookout, nor are we likely to if we go down the vigilante route. Patterns repeat. The damage inflicted on children by parents, in all likelihood, was inflicted on those parents by THEIR parents.
I remember in the early 60's a big burly bobby who used to take his jacket off to those who thought were " tough " and caused mischief and mayhem,rather than go through the process of booking or arresting,etc. His method worked ! There was never any more bother because of the initial shock they got.The same bobby also used to swipe them around the mouth with his leather gloves if they swore at him or gave him cheek.
A thick ear is better than a taser !
-
I remember in the early 60's a big burly bobby who used to take his jacket off to those who thought were " tough " and caused mischief and mayhem,rather than go through the process of booking or arresting,etc. His method worked ! There was never any more bother because of the initial shock they got.The same bobby also used to swipe them around the mouth with his leather gloves if they swore at him or gave him cheek.
A thick ear is better than a taser !
How different is a policeman who thinks he can "get away with it" from a common criminal who thinks the same. Sooner or later both will try getting away with much larger things. You scream retribution, on the Jeremy Bamber threads, to those police you believe are guilty of "getting away with it".
-
I was a child of the 1960s and would play out at night, not have to worry about homework until age 11 and not have to worry about a stranger as there was a homogeneous community where everybody knew everybody else. This included Police and the worst crime I can recall as a child was someone vandalizing a telephone box. What a transformation now where parents are just too flaked out after work to communicate with their kids, who rarely get exercise outside of school because they're on the computer for hours at a time(and who is supervising them?) and nobody dares to tell their little darlings off for the slightest thing lest they're castigated for interfering. Yet we have the unhappiest children in the world according to a recent survey. Something has gone badly wrong.
-
The world is nowhere near as nice a place as it used to be,particularly this country which has been run for years by idiots.
I fear for the futures of children, and having just watched a family moving to Adelaide,I'd say that they did the right thing for their young daughter. I think I'd advise anyone to go there if they want a future,or indeed a stress-free life, or even a life at all because it can only get worse here.
-
But we don't live in a perfect world, Lookout, nor are we likely to if we go down the vigilante route. Patterns repeat. The damage inflicted on children by parents, in all likelihood, was inflicted on those parents by THEIR parents.
There actually is a vigilante group in operation that helps disclose names and whereabouts of paedophiles. Nadia Sawalha and Linda Robson are its supporters.
-
There actually is a vigilante group in operation that helps disclose names and whereabouts of paedophiles. Nadia Sawalha and Linda Robson are its supporters.
I believe an innocent guy was killed horribly because vigilantes decreed him guilty of paedophilia. When hounds are hungry for blood, they don't care whose it is. It's what happens when mobs rule.
-
I believe an innocent guy was killed horribly because vigilantes decreed him guilty of paedophilia. When hounds are hungry for blood, they don't care whose it is. It's what happens when mobs rule.
So ? There are times when police shoot first and ask later. It happens when there is so much criminality that everyone,even the police become over-zealous. Even tasers have killed the REAL criminal,is that also a worry to you ?
-
So ? There are times when police shoot first and ask later. It happens when there is so much criminality that everyone,even the police become over-zealous. Even tasers have killed the REAL criminal,is that also a worry to you ?
So you support vigilantes killing innocent people?
-
So you support vigilantes killing innocent people?
You said it------I didn't !!
-
You said it------I didn't !!
It was a question. Note the question mark.
-
Am quite impressed with this from Michael Gove..
Former Justice Secretary Michael Gove tells packed Longford audience prison time should be used “to repair lives not further blight them”
“The problem – in a nutshell,” said Michael Gove, “is that we have a system operating at practically full capacity with nowhere near enough flexibility to devote the time care and attention needed to secure successful rehabilitation.” He spoke passionately about the need for the leadership team at NOMS, “to ensure prisoners are properly assessed on entry to the prison estate, moved on through the system as their sentence is served and also, if necessary, moved as debts and threats, changing circumstances and new challenges emerge. In an estate with scarcely any headroom or slack in the system that has led to centralised control in order simply to ensure that every prisoner is – at the very least – housed in accordance with their security level.”
There should be clear demarcation in the prison estate “Ideally, we should have prisons which cater for remand prisoners, some high security establishments for those who pose the very greatest threat, facilities within the high security estate for extremists and those intent on proselytisation and terrorist recruitment, prisons which specialise in dealing with sex offenders and – above all – community prisons with strong external links to education and employment providers who can prepare prisoners for effective re-entry into society,” he said.
But in order for that to happen, “to make our prisons effective at rehabilitation,” he said, “will require some clear thinking and resolute action on questions as varied as the treatment of young offenders, the place of women prisoners, the implementation of new technology and sentencing reform.”
So who does he believe are the people who make up our prison population? “The first thing to say is that they are all individuals,” he said. “There are peers and priests who’ve been prisoners, consummate charmers and men even their mothers would be hard-pushed to love, dedicated career criminals and those who’ve made just one horrendous mistake. But even though you find all sorts and conditions of men (and women) in prison there are some groups which have historically been over-represented, given their numbers overall in our society.”
More sensitivity required
“We should certainly be much more sensitive to the way in which so many of those who come into contact with our criminal justice system are individuals who have been abused or neglected as children,” he said. “They will have witnessed domestic violence when growing up, have been failed by the education system and who have been in foster or other residential care. They will often have been brought up by adults with addictions or other mental health problems. They will, in all too many cases, suffer from substance abuse and mental illness themselves. They will have been harmed not just physically and psychologically, they will also have endured spiritual and moral deprivation.”
Make an effort to understand
“Many of those in our jails never had someone who loved them enough when they were young to tell them the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “They will have grown up in homes where affection was absent or fleeting, authority arbitrary or brutal. They will never have developed the habits of consideration towards others, deferred gratification and empathy which are the cement of civilisation. Of course, the overwhelming majority of those who’ve faced such challenging childhoods make successes of their lives. But their achievements deserve all the more recognition because of the difficulties they’ve overcome. And those of us who’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy love, stability and carefully policed boundaries when we’ve been growing up should make an extra effort to understand the lives of others who’ve lived with coldness, violence and chaos.”
If we try to understand, he argued, “we might appreciate why children who’ve learned that showing weakness only invites abuse cover up the fact they can’t read in class with shows of bravado and disruptive behaviour. These same boys, finding learning difficult and school alienating, increasingly play truant or invite expulsion. They then find a deceptive warmth in the intimacy of gang culture, a fragile respect from out-doing their peers in violence or daring and an adrenalin-charged thrill from breaking the law. Being thought of as a player by others living the life provides a spurious sense of achievement for those who’ve never been valued in any other way. So many of those in our prisons are damaged individuals, victims themselves, and we should be careful about the moral judgements we make about them.”
Social capital
There still has to be punishment when the law is broken, he said, “The civic order depends on our policing the boundaries between right and wrong with determination. But it’s critical to appreciate that many of those who are in our prisons grew up without the social capital or moral reinforcement the rest of us have been fortunate enough to enjoy. Their ability to resist temptation and to avoid acting impulsively will have been impaired by their upbringing and eroded by their circumstances. That does not mean when they offend that we should suspend the operation of the law on which the social order depends. But the deprivation of liberty inherent in being sent to prison is punishment enough.”
Every human soul precious
Importantly he reminded the audience, “Offenders should not face further degradation or indignity when in custody. Quite the opposite. We should use that time to repair lives not further blight them. We need to ensure that prisons build up the resources of character and resilience which will mean prisoners are less likely to offend in future. I believe, with Frank Longford, that such a mission is vital because every single human soul is precious and all of us can achieve something worthwhile if the circumstances are right.”
“But even if you’re a hard-bitten cynic who regards such language as hopelessly naive nonsense and you believe the purpose of the justice system is not to help bad people but protect good people then you should want to ensure our prisons are more effective at rehabilitation. Because at the moment half of those sent to prison offend again after their release. We spend hundreds of thousands keeping these individuals detained under state control. We govern who they see and what they do, what they learn and how they work, who leads and who follows, every minute of their life for months or perhaps years at a time. And after all that they go on to offend again, and again. Now that really is criminal.”
http://www.insidetime.org/whats-really-criminal-about-our-justice-system/
-
The latest horror story to come from Truss is that millions are going to be spent building more prisons !
Why ??
How about those,who we fund through our taxes,namely the police, start upholding the law as it should be done by preventing crime before it takes place,thus avoiding prison sentences to start with ?
Prevention is better than cure every time. Stop wasting money and resources on all things petty and instead start a programme and re-education on crime prevention.
Police must now know those who are hardened criminals or those who flout the law,enough to track them to put a stop to their criminality from spreading ?
Once upon a time we had the best force in the world,along with education and the NHS and now we intend building more prisons----------for God's sake what does that now tell the world about this small country ?
-
From former Justice Secretary Michael Gove:
Many of those in our jails never had someone who loved them enough when they were young to tell them the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “They will have grown up in homes where affection was absent or fleeting, authority arbitrary or brutal. They will never have developed the habits of consideration towards others, deferred gratification and empathy which are the cement of civilisation. Of course, the overwhelming majority of those who’ve faced such challenging childhoods make successes of their lives. But their achievements deserve all the more recognition because of the difficulties they’ve overcome. And those of us who’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy love, stability and carefully policed boundaries when we’ve been growing up should make an extra effort to understand the lives of others who’ve lived with coldness, violence and chaos.”
I wonder whether this is applicable in the following case: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-uks-youngest-double-9068027
-
From former Justice Secretary Michael Gove:
Many of those in our jails never had someone who loved them enough when they were young to tell them the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “They will have grown up in homes where affection was absent or fleeting, authority arbitrary or brutal. They will never have developed the habits of consideration towards others, deferred gratification and empathy which are the cement of civilisation. Of course, the overwhelming majority of those who’ve faced such challenging childhoods make successes of their lives. But their achievements deserve all the more recognition because of the difficulties they’ve overcome. And those of us who’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy love, stability and carefully policed boundaries when we’ve been growing up should make an extra effort to understand the lives of others who’ve lived with coldness, violence and chaos.”
I wonder whether this is applicable in the following case: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-uks-youngest-double-9068027
Goodness! I didn't think I would ever agree with Michael Gove!
However much such crimes can horrify and disturb us I do think we should always at least be aware of the abuse such children may have suffered.
If babies and children are never shown love and care, if their sense of self and compassion is never nurtured and all they see is anger and cruelty then imo surely their abusers are at least as guilty of their behaviour as they are themselves. Unfortunately these adults are often also the product of severe damage and abuse themselves....
I don't know the reason why some children who are horrendously abused don't develop sociopathic behaviour and others do. I'm sure psychiatrists and psychologists have studied this in detail but I would guess genetics have some bearing. Nature and nurture are probably equally important.
-
From former Justice Secretary Michael Gove:
Many of those in our jails never had someone who loved them enough when they were young to tell them the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “They will have grown up in homes where affection was absent or fleeting, authority arbitrary or brutal. They will never have developed the habits of consideration towards others, deferred gratification and empathy which are the cement of civilisation. Of course, the overwhelming majority of those who’ve faced such challenging childhoods make successes of their lives. But their achievements deserve all the more recognition because of the difficulties they’ve overcome. And those of us who’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy love, stability and carefully policed boundaries when we’ve been growing up should make an extra effort to understand the lives of others who’ve lived with coldness, violence and chaos.”
I wonder whether this is applicable in the following case: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-uks-youngest-double-9068027
The above is no excuse to murder. I can't/don't agree with Gove at all.
This was a downright evil killing with no thought for anyone but themselves, fraught with jealousy on the side of the killer,and a means to end what was a totally selfish and thoughtless act.
-
From former Justice Secretary Michael Gove:
Many of those in our jails never had someone who loved them enough when they were young to tell them the difference between right and wrong,” he said. “They will have grown up in homes where affection was absent or fleeting, authority arbitrary or brutal. They will never have developed the habits of consideration towards others, deferred gratification and empathy which are the cement of civilisation. Of course, the overwhelming majority of those who’ve faced such challenging childhoods make successes of their lives. But their achievements deserve all the more recognition because of the difficulties they’ve overcome. And those of us who’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy love, stability and carefully policed boundaries when we’ve been growing up should make an extra effort to understand the lives of others who’ve lived with coldness, violence and chaos.”
I wonder whether this is applicable in the following case: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-uks-youngest-double-9068027
Steve, I can't tell you how many times people have told me that the ubiquitous "they" SHOULD have done.....................!!!! "They" frequently don't know how. "They" have never seen it demonstrated, ergo, "they" will repeat the habits/patterns they HAVE seen demonstrated. I imagine those two murdering children both felt abandoned. Their diverse reasons are irrelevant. Abandonment is abandonment. I really don't believe it's possible for any of us to set aside those things which were implanted into us before we reached an age where we could reason. The most we can do -and this may require years of therapy- is to examine them, see them for what they are, and put them in a place where we can handle them without them damaging us further.
-
Goodness! I didn't think I would ever agree with Michael Gove!
However much such crimes can horrify and disturb us I do think we should always at least be aware of the abuse such children may have suffered.
If babies and children are never shown love and care, if their sense of self and compassion is never nurtured and all they see is anger and cruelty then imo surely their abusers are at least as guilty of their behaviour as they are themselves. Unfortunately these adults are often also the product of severe damage and abuse themselves....
I don't know the reason why some children who are horrendously abused don't develop sociopathic behaviour and others do. I'm sure psychiatrists and psychologists have studied this in detail but I would guess genetics have some bearing. Nature and nurture are probably equally important.
Terrific post, Maggie. 100% accurate and factual. Tragically, I'm not certain that an adult, SO damaged in childhood, can ever make a full recovery because in moments of severe stress, those childhood feelings will return, unbidden.
-
The above is no excuse to murder. I can't/don't agree with Gove at all.
This was a downright evil killing with no thought for anyone but themselves, fraught with jealousy on the side of the killer,and a means to end what was a totally selfish and thoughtless act.
I don't think anyone is offering excuses, Lookout. What's being offered is reason and explanation for it. Jealousy is a perfectly natural human response. It's something we all feel when our own needs aren't being met. It's at the heart of all sibling rivalry. As for the evil act done "with no thought for anyone but themselves" I imagine the both children felt as if no one had ever given thought to them.
-
I don't think anyone is offering excuses, Lookout. What's being offered is reason and explanation for it. Jealousy is a perfectly natural human response. It's something we all feel when our own needs aren't being met. It's at the heart of all sibling rivalry. As for the evil act done "with no thought for anyone but themselves" I imagine the both children felt as if no one had ever given thought to them.
You sound as if you agree that the murder was justified ? NO murder ever is !
-
The above is no excuse to murder. I can't/don't agree with Gove at all.
This was a downright evil killing with no thought for anyone but themselves, fraught with jealousy on the side of the killer,and a means to end what was a totally selfish and thoughtless act.
I agree with your reaction to the crime Lookout but there is always cause and effect imo. If these children became so evil there has to be a reason, although I am not trying to excuse the crime. They were either born that way or they were taught to behave that way. Children learn by example imo. :)
-
You sound as if you agree that the murder was justified ? NO murder ever is !
Perhaps you should have read what I ACTUALLY said, rather than what you think I said.
-
I agree with your reaction to the crime Lookout but there is always cause and effect imo. If these children became so evil there has to be a reason, although I am not trying to excuse the crime. They were either born that way or they were taught to behave that way. Children learn by example imo. :)
As we all know,a child learns " right from wrong " at a very early age. I agree that children learn by example,but not all of them do, either because of an inborn rebellious nature or a mental health issue.
Many children from bad backgrounds do well in life because of their aim and determination to get themselves out of a bad family situation, as they look to the future. Granted,this was more a time when job prospects were more of a guarantee than now but no teen " in their right mind " would have resorted to murder when things were tough.
I can't bring myself to excuse the monstrous behaviour of these teens and the excuse of a bad family background doesn't do it for me at all. Not when I've known of horrendous family situations in the past where neglected children had to deal with alcoholic parents.I've seen it all Maggie and heartbreaking as it was,those children had no thoughts of crime in any way,just to do well at school and get a job as far away from that household as they could.
This is why my reasoning is so diverse and controversial.
-
The professionals have their work cut out with these two. Will they be up to the job? I can't help wondering what happened to them in Infant School, Junior School, Secondary School. Did they form no emotional attachment to anyone and were they so inexpressive and insecure they both fell under the radar?
Will they ever be released? Can they ever be released?
-
As we all know,a child learns " right from wrong " at a very early age. I agree that children learn by example,but not all of them do, either because of an inborn rebellious nature or a mental health issue.
Many children from bad backgrounds do well in life because of their aim and determination to get themselves out of a bad family situation, as they look to the future. Granted,this was more a time when job prospects were more of a guarantee than now but no teen " in their right mind " would have resorted to murder when things were tough.
I can't bring myself to excuse the monstrous behaviour of these teens and the excuse of a bad family background doesn't do it for me at all. Not when I've known of horrendous family situations in the past where neglected children had to deal with alcoholic parents.I've seen it all Maggie and heartbreaking as it was,those children had no thoughts of crime in any way,just to do well at school and get a job as far away from that household as they could.
This is why my reasoning is so diverse and controversial.
That's interesting Lookout. They were both only 14 years old at the time so I'm wondering whether socio-economic factors played a part? They would be just starting their GCSE courses. We don't know enough of the background yet apart from the girl claiming her mother favoritized her sister over her.
I also have doubts about releasing their names to the public at so young an age.
-
I have to question the teaching methods this day and age compared to the 50's,Steve. In fact,I question everything in this " modern " society and why everything changed,not always for the better.
As regards these two monsters,they should never be released,as someone who enjoyed " the smell of blood " will forever be a danger. This is far from normal.
-
As we all know,a child learns " right from wrong " at a very early age. I agree that children learn by example,but not all of them do, either because of an inborn rebellious nature or a mental health issue.
Many children from bad backgrounds do well in life because of their aim and determination to get themselves out of a bad family situation, as they look to the future. Granted,this was more a time when job prospects were more of a guarantee than now but no teen " in their right mind " would have resorted to murder when things were tough.
I can't bring myself to excuse the monstrous behaviour of these teens and the excuse of a bad family background doesn't do it for me at all. Not when I've known of horrendous family situations in the past where neglected children had to deal with alcoholic parents.I've seen it all Maggie and heartbreaking as it was,those children had no thoughts of crime in any way,just to do well at school and get a job as far away from that household as they could.
This is why my reasoning is so diverse and controversial.
Your reasoning to me is neither diverse nor controversial. Simply devoid of empathy. No one is suggesting that such appalling behaviours are condoned, nor murder excused -although you excuse Jeremy- and simply saying "it's heartbreaking" is a cerebral, rather than an emotional response. Understanding ISN'T condoning. You appear to live in a world in which there are prescribed behaviours with books of instructions on how such behaviours are acted out. The problem for many is that they can't read and they world of which you speak is long gone.
-
I have to question the teaching methods this day and age compared to the 50's,Steve. In fact,I question everything in this " modern " society and why everything changed,not always for the better.
As regards these two monsters,they should never be released,as someone who enjoyed " the smell of blood " will forever be a danger. This is far from normal.
I wouldn't like to judge at this stage but they are for sure symptomatic of the failure of modern society which puts the individual above all else, though fortunately an extremely rare case.
-
I have to question the teaching methods this day and age compared to the 50's,Steve. In fact,I question everything in this " modern " society and why everything changed,not always for the better.
As regards these two monsters,they should never be released,as someone who enjoyed " the smell of blood " will forever be a danger. This is far from normal.
OK. Emotionally, they may be the monsters you accuse them of being. In fact, they're both horrendously damaged children. Damaged to the point where it appears they have no feelings. The days are long gone when we'd lock and chain them up and throw away the key. However, I can offer nothing by way of suggestion for how they might productively and positively live out their lives. I'm afraid the island, advocated by Steve, is becoming rather overcrowded.
-
OK. Emotionally, they may be the monsters you accuse them of being. In fact, they're both horrendously damaged children. Damaged to the point where it appears they have no feelings. The days are long gone when we'd lock and chain them up and throw away the key. However, I can offer nothing by way of suggestion for how they might productively and positively live out their lives. I'm afraid the island, advocated by Steve, is becoming rather overcrowded.
I don't think we know enough about the circumstances of the case, but whatever they are they are going to be interned for many years, I wonder whether the professionals will be up to the job and their rehabilitation has been made harder to say the least by divulging their identities to the public.
-
As we all know,a child learns " right from wrong " at a very early age. I agree that children learn by example,but not all of them do, either because of an inborn rebellious nature or a mental health issue.
Many children from bad backgrounds do well in life because of their aim and determination to get themselves out of a bad family situation, as they look to the future. Granted,this was more a time when job prospects were more of a guarantee than now but no teen " in their right mind " would have resorted to murder when things were tough.
I can't bring myself to excuse the monstrous behaviour of these teens and the excuse of a bad family background doesn't do it for me at all. Not when I've known of horrendous family situations in the past where neglected children had to deal with alcoholic parents.I've seen it all Maggie and heartbreaking as it was,those children had no thoughts of crime in any way,just to do well at school and get a job as far away from that household as they could.
This is why my reasoning is so diverse and controversial.
I know many children overcome all kinds of abuse and cruelty and grow up to be good parents and human beings but some don't and that is the question.
Do we allow them to be pilloried and abused some more or do we try to at least understand the causes of such wickedness? By understanding we may be able to stop or reduce the incidence of it.
Of course while our Child Protection and Safeguarding Children's services are stripped to the bone and understaffed there's little hope for these lost children.
-
I don't think we know enough about the circumstances of the case, but whatever they are they are going to be interned for many years, I wonder whether the professionals will be up to the job and their rehabilitation has been made harder to say the least by divulging their identities to the public.
Steve, I imagine that both these children have been numbed by their life experiences. They KNOW what they've done and what's been done to them. They can't FEEL what they've done, OR, for that matter, what's been done to them. I think it will take decades to strip away the numbness. IF it can be successfully stripped away, what will be left is likely to be raw and excruciating pain and guilt which is also going to need dealing with. For a moment, their only friends -the only ones who understood- were each other. Separating them will bring it's own problems. I can't see a happy future for either of them.
-
I know many children overcome all kinds of abuse and cruelty and grow up to be good parents and human beings but some don't and that is the question.
Do we allow them to be pilloried and abused some more or do we try to at least understand the causes of such wickedness? By understanding we may be able to stop or reduce the incidence of it.
Of course while our Child Protection and Safeguarding Children's services are stripped to the bone and understaffed there's little hope for these lost children.
We certainly can't help THEM if we take the kind of stance advocated by Lookout. We HAVE to try to understand what turned innocent children into murdering teenagers. Reading about their treatment, I'd have thought it might have been easy enough to understand.
-
I wouldn't like to judge at this stage but they are for sure symptomatic of the failure of modern society which puts the individual above all else, though fortunately an extremely rare case.
I do not accept that child murderers are necessarily the product of the modern age but rather a product of human behavour.
I am sure it is something that has always happened, although relatively rarely as far as we know.
-
That's interesting Lookout. They were both only 14 years old at the time so I'm wondering whether socio-economic factors played a part? They would be just starting their GCSE courses. We don't know enough of the background yet apart from the girl claiming her mother favoritized her sister over her.
I also have doubts about releasing their names to the public at so young an age.
We don't actually know if their mother did favour the younger sister. It's only about what the older child felt.
-
I know many children overcome all kinds of abuse and cruelty and grow up to be good parents and human beings but some don't and that is the question.
Do we allow them to be pilloried and abused some more or do we try to at least understand the causes of such wickedness? By understanding we may be able to stop or reduce the incidence of it.
Of course while our Child Protection and Safeguarding Children's services are stripped to the bone and understaffed there's little hope for these lost children.
With all the horrendous crimes that are about now,I just fear for the future and the futures of my and others, great/grandchildren.
You would have thought that during my time of growing up with so little money that crime would have been at its highest ? But no,there's more money now than there's ever been and crime is higher than it's ever been ? Why is that and what's the answer ? Where is all this money going ?
-
What are the priorities of people and families today ?
-
What are the priorities of people and families today ?
I remember discipline in the home, boundaries you knew you mustn't transgress. We saved up for things over weeks, not put them on a credit card. I think parents are just too tired today after the stress of work to do their job at home, if that's their real parents that is and not stepdad, hands tied by the liberal Establishment.
-
With all the horrendous crimes that are about now,I just fear for the future and the futures of my and others, great/grandchildren.
You would have thought that during my time of growing up with so little money that crime would have been at its highest ? But no,there's more money now than there's ever been and crime is higher than it's ever been ? Why is that and what's the answer ? Where is all this money going ?
It might be that after a time of austerity, parents feel free to bestow on their children, all those 'needful' things they missed out on. Perhaps they were encouraged by the politician who told them "We have never had it so good". However it happened, it appears that we all became accustomed to having more, to the point at which some believed it was their entitlement to have more. They would have passed this 'ethic' onto their children. Patterns repeat. These patterns appear to have influenced us politically. There are some who believe the state has a right to fund them -there will always be those who need that sort of support- and whilst I HATE the growing divide between the haves and the have nots, I accept that it's a given that we will NEVER all be equal, yet it appalls me that there are those who will go on producing children and indoctrinating them with the belief that they're entitled to the same as 'everyone' else. What they seem NOT to indoctrinate them with is the need both to work for it and live within their means.
-
I think as Lookout has stated these dreadful crimes are not the result of the abject poverty many faced in the 1930s, the days before the Welfare State when families had to pull together. The fact that the State gives handouts now, derisory as they are in many cases, has not alleviated the levels of crime as young people compare themselves to their peers and not their forbears.
-
I think as Lookout has stated these dreadful crimes are not the result of the abject poverty many faced in the 1930s, the days before the Welfare State when families had to pull together. The fact that the State gives handouts now, derisory as they are in many cases, has not alleviated the levels of crime as young people compare themselves to their peers and not their forbears.
That's right, Steve. You appear to be talking about a lack of self worth. Sadly, cyclical.
-
A pre-planned crime makes it all the more heinous. A boy who wished to prove himself to the female gender, a girl who had been put into care which alienated her from her mother, combined forces on social media and united in one diabolical cause. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/09/spalding-murders-judge-names-teenage-sweathearts-killed-mother/
-
A pre-planned crime makes it all the more heinous. A boy who wished to prove himself to the female gender, a girl who had been put into care which alienated her from her mother, combined forces on social media and united in one diabolical cause. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/09/spalding-murders-judge-names-teenage-sweathearts-killed-mother/
It certainly does, but there's always a reason. Nothing happens in isolation. These two were the perfect storm.
-
Times are so different now,as I didn't even have a boyfriend at 14/15. I can't even remember being interested. Neither can I imagine that either parent would have exactly made him welcome. Far from it,my father would have chased him.
Perhaps because we were lucky enough to have had a very long garden,we didn't feel the need to bother with the outside world. The surrounding neighbours who we all grew up with were company enough as we all stuck together,playing outside games,going fishing for tiddlers/sticklebacks and earning pocket-money at the farm,pea-picking and fruit-picking.
Those neighbours and myself exchange Christmas cards every year.
I'm not the only one who hates these times that we live in. It's as though it's a different world altogether.
If we,as kids years ago heard about a murder anywhere,we'd be petrified and always thought of " bad men " around. Nowadays,children are immune to the news of murderers as it's become an everyday thing and not only centred at " bad men ". Society is sad and sick. There's no deterrent.
-
Times are so different now,as I didn't even have a boyfriend at 14/15. I can't even remember being interested. Neither can I imagine that either parent would have exactly made him welcome. Far from it,my father would have chased him.
Perhaps because we were lucky enough to have had a very long garden,we didn't feel the need to bother with the outside world. The surrounding neighbours who we all grew up with were company enough as we all stuck together,playing outside games,going fishing for tiddlers/sticklebacks and earning pocket-money at the farm,pea-picking and fruit-picking.
Those neighbours and myself exchange Christmas cards every year.
I'm not the only one who hates these times that we live in. It's as though it's a different world altogether.
If we,as kids years ago heard about a murder anywhere,we'd be petrified and always thought of " bad men " around. Nowadays,children are immune to the news of murderers as it's become an everyday thing and not only centred at " bad men ". Society is sad and sick. There's no deterrent.
I feel certain that EVERY generation believes that "times are so different now". My mother said her parents wouldn't have approved. My mother, in her day, didn't approve. I accept that things have changed and not necessarily for the better, but I also acknowledge that those who are young now have nothing to compare it with. For them, it's the norm. Our words mean nothing to them.
I don't recall the same childhood you experienced. The neighbours I knew died years ago and I've lost touch with those who haven't. I didn't know any boys -save male cousins- at 14/15. At an all girls boarding school, the only men in our lives were the pop stars of the day. We were embarrassingly naive. I picked neither peas nor fruit. Not because we were grand -even if my mother thought we were a cut above!!!- it simply wasn't allowed. Probably something to do with those "bad" men I was warned about!
It IS a different world today from how it was in which EVER "then" we care to mention. Thanks to television/24/7 news/social media we're now all acutely aware of what goes on and we've become sanitized. It really doesn't matter if we don't like it. We will eventually age and die. The younger generation won't know any different until they, too, become old enough to recognize that "times are so different now". By which time, for them, like we who are saying it now, it will be too late.
-
It seems that the judicial system has an unwritten rule that children of 10 and 11 can be granted anonymity whereas a youth of 14 who may be equally immature is named and shamed. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/teen-who-beat-rough-sleeper-to-death-behind-walton-iceland-asks-for-jail-term-cut/ar-BBHsboh?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp
-
It seems that the judicial system has an unwritten rule that children of 10 and 11 can be granted anonymity whereas a youth of 14 who may be equally immature is named and shamed. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsliverpool/teen-who-beat-rough-sleeper-to-death-behind-walton-iceland-asks-for-jail-term-cut/ar-BBHsboh?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp
Sadly, Steve, the rules/laws aren't made in a way which allows for flexibility.
-
Sadly, Steve, the rules/laws aren't made in a way which allows for flexibility.
Maybe someone with a legal bent could explain the difference between the Edlington attacks and the Walton murder, and why in one case the defendants get a chance to rebuild their lives, whilst the other will have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his.
-
Maybe someone with a legal bent could explain the difference between the Edlington attacks and the Walton murder, and why in one case the defendants get a chance to rebuild their lives, whilst the other will have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his.
Hmm. Sometimes it's easier to hide behind "That's how the law works" It's always SO much easier to stick to the letter of the law. It can be a convenient way of absolving responsibility. After all, until parliament decrees otherwise, laws are as they currently stand.
-
If ever he did commit murder again all hell would break loose: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/name-him-before-he-claims-another-victim-james-bulgers-father-warns-his-sons-sexual-deviant-killer-could-strike-again-as-he-demands-he-loses-his-lifelong-anonymity/ar-BBIQjeb?li=AAmiR2Z&MSCC=1518115655&ocid=spartanntp
-
Denise is on ITV tonight at 9pm telling her story. The whole thing is heartbreaking and sad to say,it affects me greatly. More so when I think of the way that little boy died as it was never published. My reason for knowing this was through a policeman's wife who worked at the same hospital as myself at the time.
-
Did it associate his last moments alive with one of the killers in particular?
-
100% child criminals should be granted anonymity where necessary.
It's obviously an incredibly emotive subject, but in the 21st century in civilised society , there is no room for mob rule.
The English legal system governs crime and sentencing, not the general public. However hard it may be, emotion has to come out of sentencing.
-
Did it associate his last moments alive with one of the killers in particular?
The police tend to highlight Robert Thompson as the main instigator but it was John Venables who was seen leading James away and from some of the witness testimony, Venables seemed the most determined of the two. Venables has also gone on to offend again - but only they know what really happened.
-
100% child criminals should be granted anonymity where necessary.
It's obviously an incredibly emotive subject, but in the 21st century in civilised society , there is no room for mob rule.
The English legal system governs crime and sentencing, not the general public. However hard it may be, emotion has to come out of sentencing.
Agreed!
-
God help the future of this country !!
-
Did it associate his last moments alive with one of the killers in particular?
The main instigator had been Venables who'd been previously planning to murder " a " toddler. Mark my words,at sometime in his evil life,he'll murder again.
Do we sit back and say " oh dear ?"
The two monsters should have been sent in a street full of mothers---------enough said. Trial over !
-
If nobody shed a tear last night then there's something radically wrong with you !!
-
If nobody shed a tear last night then there's something radically wrong with you !!
Not sure the reason for this rant. There is no one here (I would imagine) that doesn't feel the same anger and sorrow for what happened to little James and sick at the thought of two 10 year old boys being responsible - you don't hold the monopoly. BUT, the kind of world you're advocating is a one where people just take revenge and that's not what the law is about and you can't make exceptions because something stirs emotion.
-
Not sure the reason for this rant. There is no one here (I would imagine) that doesn't feel the same anger and sorrow for what happened to little James and sick at the thought of two 10 year old boys being responsible - you don't hold the monopoly. BUT, the kind of world you're advocating is a one where people just take revenge and that's not what the law is about and you can't make exceptions because something stirs emotion.
It's not only this case that stirs emotions. The system itself is buggered. Look at that Worboys creature------8 years ? For ruining over 100 womens lives. Meaning he'll be out in about 4 to carry on his sick game.
I'm heartily sick in general at the kid-glove treatment of some monsters. They're looked after---new identities and everything else,but WHAT about the victims in all of these crimes ?
Denise has never been given the justice that's so badly needed--------it's ALL about the criminals as it is with every heinous crime.It would seem that the bigger the crime,the better the criminal gets treated.
In this country,we house terrorists,but the government are Hell-bent in sending innocent people back to their countries. I'm supporting a foreign paramedic and an American man ( who's married here and has lived in this country for 17 years) and the idiots in the Home office have decided to deport him ??
-
The main instigator had been Venables who'd been previously planning to murder " a " toddler. Mark my words,at sometime in his evil life,he'll murder again.
Do we sit back and say " oh dear ?"
The two monsters should have been sent in a street full of mothers---------enough said. Trial over !
Out of interest what are your thoughts regarding Robert Thompson who has been out of prison for 17 years, has managed to move on in his life and hasn't re-offended, instead settling back into community.
Is he still a monster who should be locked up for life? Are you happy that he appears to have turned his life around, or do you believe he should have served time in an adult prison alongside other serious offenders where he may well have been influenced to a continued life of crime on release?
On a separate note, the first documentary regarding James Bulger screened on Channel was an absolute disgrace, allowing McKenzie who is reviled in the city of Liverpool, a mouthpiece
-
Out of interest what are your thoughts regarding Robert Thompson who has been out of prison for 17 years, has managed to move on in his life and hasn't re-offended, instead settling back into community.
Is he still a monster who should be locked up for life? Are you happy that he appears to have turned his life around, or do you believe he should have served time in an adult prison alongside other serious offenders where he may well have been influenced to a continued life of crime on release?
On a separate note, the first documentary regarding James Bulger screened on Channel was an absolute disgrace, allowing McKenzie who is reviled in the city of Liverpool, a mouthpiece
I wouldn't count your chickens over Thompson either ! These people don't change.
-
Only Denise,a mother,understands. I applaud her dignity.
-
Only Denise,a mother,understands. I applaud her dignity.
You speak from an emotion driven, victims perspective. .
I speak from a legal, criminologist viewpoint.
-
You speak from an emotion driven, victims perspective. .
I speak from a legal, criminologist viewpoint.
Each to their own,eh ?
Why can't I speak up for the victims-----the law certainly doesn't,it's only a job to you and your ilk.
-
It's not only this case that stirs emotions. The system itself is buggered. Look at that Worboys creature------8 years ? For ruining over 100 womens lives. Meaning he'll be out in about 4 to carry on his sick game.
I'm heartily sick in general at the kid-glove treatment of some monsters. They're looked after---new identities and everything else,but WHAT about the victims in all of these crimes ?
Denise has never been given the justice that's so badly needed--------it's ALL about the criminals as it is with every heinous crime.It would seem that the bigger the crime,the better the criminal gets treated.
In this country,we house terrorists,but the government are Hell-bent in sending innocent people back to their countries. I'm supporting a foreign paramedic and an American man ( who's married here and has lived in this country for 17 years) and the idiots in the Home office have decided to deport him ??
I didn't say it was.
-
Was that an afterthought ?
-
The programme also highlighted a similar murder which took place in one of the Nordic countries. The murderers were two 6 year old boys. The whole community mourned, with her parents, the loss of their little girl, but the two small boys -because in their country it's the law that every child must receive the same education- were given ongoing therapy and sent to kindergarten from where they will proceed with the same education as other children. Parents of other children were given assurances that no harm would come to their children. Allegedly, none has. Their crime is never spoken of.
-
Each to their own,eh ?
Why can't I speak up for the victims-----the law certainly doesn't,it's only a job to you and your ilk.
It depends what you think should be given priority. Decisions which are based on emotions, or decisions which are based on the criminal justice system and laws of the land.
I've never been a criminal lawyer btw.
-
It depends what you think should be given priority. Decisions which are based on emotions, or decisions which are based on the criminal justice system and laws of the land.
I've never been a criminal lawyer btw.
The emotions and long-term effects on the victims should be a priority--------but sadly are not. Many poor victims of childhood abuse such as was meted out by two " men " in their so-called professional capacity,one a football coach and the other a physiotherapist whose victims suffered enormously and who will never ever get over their ordeals while the perpetrators will only be thinking of themselves and how they're going to cope being locked-up,with no regard for the lasting damage they've done to their innocent victims who'd trusted these men.
Little James Bulger trusted those two boys to take him home to his mum,but it never happened.
Yes-----emotions matter a lot and consideration for the victims state of health is paramount.
Never mind about the criminals as their health and welfare will be taken care of courtesy of the taxpayers and the do-gooders who make sure that no harm comes to them !!
-
Was that an afterthought ?
Eh?
-
The emotions and long-term effects on the victims should be a priority--------but sadly are not. Many poor victims of childhood abuse such as was meted out by two " men " in their so-called professional capacity,one a football coach and the other a physiotherapist whose victims suffered enormously and who will never ever get over their ordeals while the perpetrators will only be thinking of themselves and how they're going to cope being locked-up,with no regard for the lasting damage they've done to their innocent victims who'd trusted these men.
Little James Bulger trusted those two boys to take him home to his mum,but it never happened.
Yes-----emotions matter a lot and consideration for the victims state of health is paramount.
Never mind about the criminals as their health and welfare will be taken care of courtesy of the taxpayers and the do-gooders who make sure that no harm comes to them !!
So the families concerns should be taken into consideration when sentencing and perhaps influence the judgement?
-
So the families concerns should be taken into consideration when sentencing and perhaps influence the judgement?
Are they not? I thought victim statements could be read out, to the convicted person, prior to sentencing, by the victim.
-
The programme also highlighted a similar murder which took place in one of the Nordic countries. The murderers were two 6 year old boys. The whole community mourned, with her parents, the loss of their little girl, but the two small boys -because in their country it's the law that every child must receive the same education- were given ongoing therapy and sent to kindergarten from where they will proceed with the same education as other children. Parents of other children were given assurances that no harm would come to their children. Allegedly, none has. Their crime is never spoken of.
I understand the Norwegian approach and in many ways it's exemplary. But one of the main differences was that the two boys who killed the girl were six years old, and even in this country they would not have been held legally accountable. Another difference is that it's a far more homogeneous society (or at least it was in 1994) and the wealth is spread more equally. I do feel that child killers should be granted anonymity in all cases. However a problem arises when the same children become adults and show an inclination to continue deviant behaviour. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/679894/Norway-6-year-old-killers-Silje-Redergard-James-Bulger-case-Trondheim
-
So the families concerns should be taken into consideration when sentencing and perhaps influence the judgement?
It's what happened in JB's case didn't it ??
-
I understand the Norwegian approach and in many ways it's exemplary. But one of the main differences was that the two boys who killed the girl were six years old, and even in this country they would not have been held legally accountable. Another difference is that it's a far more homogeneous society (or at least it was in 1994) and the wealth is spread more equally. I do feel that child killers should be granted anonymity in all cases. However a problem arises when the same children become adults and show an inclination to continue deviant behaviour. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/679894/Norway-6-year-old-killers-Silje-Redergard-James-Bulger-case-Trondheim
Steve, I keep hearing that "At their age, they were old enough to know right from wrong" Whilst this may be true, it doesn't mean that they fully understood the consequences of their actions, compared, say, with the violence of the video's they watched. Sadly, I believe it was probably always too late to rehabilitate Venebles, but unlike posters who seem to be awaiting the time when Thomson reverts to the type they've painted him as being, I think he deserves a second chance.
-
Are they not? I thought victim statements could be read out, to the convicted person, prior to sentencing, by the victim.
I think Caroline was pointing out the hypocrisy. ;D
-
I think Caroline was pointing out the hypocrisy. ;D
Yes Mat. I did see the irony....................eventually ;D
-
Yes Mat. I did see the irony....................eventually ;D
I had complete faith! ;D
-
I had complete faith! ;D
:-*
-
It's what happened in JB's case didn't it ??
Yes, and you have condemned it.
-
I think Caroline was pointing out the hypocrisy. ;D
Well, there certainly seems to be some conflict of opinion ;D ;D
-
Nothing wrong in me pointing out that the law/justice is a**e about face is there ?
It certainly isn't me,but if it gives you something to b***h about----------carry on.
-
Nothing wrong in me pointing out that the law/justice is a**e about face is there ?
It certainly isn't me,but if it gives you something to b***h about----------carry on.
I just wonder what's going to happen in these rare instances where children have been named, and whilst a decade in some kind of unit offering therapy and making them face up to their crimes I would not argue against I ask myself what responsibility the purveyors of Pulp Fiction and Natural Born Killers have in all this.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/13/teenage-killer-of-teacher-ann-maguire-asked-classmate-to-film-attack
The Life Of Brian was too much for me..
-
Nothing wrong in me pointing out that the law/justice is a**e about face is there ?
It certainly isn't me,but if it gives you something to b***h about----------carry on.
One the one hand, you're arguing that the feelings of the family should be taken into account when sentencing but in another (where Jermy is concerned), the family should never have gotten involved. Perhaps the CPS should send you a list of cases ready for court and you can decide with your 'intuition' whether that person is guilty or innocent; then the court can decide which families will have a say! ???
-
One the one hand, you're arguing that the feelings of the family should be taken into account when sentencing but in another (where Jermy is concerned), the family should never have gotten involved. Perhaps the CPS should send you a list of cases ready for court and you can decide with your 'intuition' whether that person is guilty or innocent; then the court can decide which families will have a say! ???
My argument is that victims don't have a say.Why do you think that these tragedies are brought up year after year ? So that the general public remain reminded of the heinous crimes which took place and where justice was never served to these people.
ALL the victims of horrendous historic child abuse were never granted the justice that they deserved. I feel very strongly about this and my heart goes out to the poor souls who suffered at the hands of some who held positions in " high places ".
Where was it I read that " our justice system is a joke ?" It's that alright !
-
Rhys Jones's killer is due to be freed any time.
A thug and a ne'er-do-well who'll be in and out of prison for the rest of his life--------or his crimes,like the the last for dealing heroin was dropped,will be covered up so as not to show him in a bad light,tsk.
Crime is laughing in the face of its victims.
Sentencing is nowhere near severe enough for murderers.
-
25 years since James was brutally murdered,it's been decided to hold a full-scale public inquiry into the investigation surrounding the child's murder.25 years ??
Many issues were " swept under the carpet ". ( I've heard that before )
-
So-called " experts " had insisted that Venables had been rehabilitated-------------WRONG ! An issue which is going to be investigated during the debate in Parliament. This is a new probe into this horrendous case.
-
I think it's these gangs which should be broken up, connected with the drugs issue and income inequality, all of which seem to have increased over the years.
-
I think it's these gangs which should be broken up, connected with the drugs issue and income inequality, all of which seems to have increased over the years.
There's no doubt about that Steve. Gangs have bred career criminals which is a " habit " hard to break.
-
I think it's these gangs which should be broken up, connected with the drugs issue and income inequality, all of which seem to have increased over the years.
What would be your answer to income inequality, Steve?
-
What would be your answer to income inequality, Steve?
Well let's look at Norway. It's not just one element but the totality which matters:people are willing to pay high taxes for good public services because they know what they're getting, and more importantly it is still a homogeneous society so there's less resentment all round, helped by a restrained Press, which does not whip up hatred at the first opportunity.
-
Well let's look at Norway. It's not just one element but the totality which matters:people are willing to pay high taxes for good public services because they know what they're getting, and more importantly it is still a homogeneous society so there's less resentment all round, helped by a restrained Press, which does not whip up hatred at the first opportunity.
Mmm. Norway sounds like Utopia but we know it has it's own problems. I believe people here WOULD agree to paying higher taxes if they felt that most - even if not all - their needs were being met. We live in a society in which it appears that when one crosses the line between private citizen and MP, the old rules become eradicated and one becomes privy to an entirely new and personal to MP's set. We walk into council offices and witness the opulence of the decorations and soft furnishings. We're privy to the vast amounts spent on lavish entertaining whilst we see ever more and deeper cuts to our services. There was a time when bin men were proud to exhibit their prowess in carrying bins on their shoulders. Now, people in their 80's are required to wheel bins to the dust carts because the bin men won't negotiate steps or slopes. It MAY be a chicken/egg situation but my own feeling is that the health/well being of society starts at the top with leaders who have everyone's best interests at heart, rather than just the pockets of share holders in vast companies. There will never be perfect balance between those who work damned hard for every penny and those who believe it's a government's right to keep them, but it might help if the media ceased pushing it in our faces that such an attitude is alive and well.
-
Mmm. Norway sounds like Utopia but we know it has it's own problems. I believe people here WOULD agree to paying higher taxes if they felt that most - even if not all - their needs were being met. We live in a society in which it appears that when one crosses the line between private citizen and MP, the old rules become eradicated and one becomes privy to an entirely new and personal to MP's set. We walk into council offices and witness the opulence of the decorations and soft furnishings. We're privy to the vast amounts spent on lavish entertaining whilst we see ever more and deeper cuts to our services. There was a time when bin men were proud to exhibit their prowess in carrying bins on their shoulders. Now, people in their 80's are required to wheel bins to the dust carts because the bin men won't negotiate steps or slopes. It MAY be a chicken/egg situation but my own feeling is that the health/well being of society starts at the top with leaders who have everyone's best interests at heart, rather than just the pockets of share holders in vast companies. There will never be perfect balance between those who work damned hard for every penny and those who believe it's a government's right to keep them, but it might help if the media ceased pushing it in our faces that such an attitude is alive and well.
I agree that you can't extrapolate from one single country but being overpopulated doesn't help. Life has become inordinately stressful and the bin man is probably doing the work of someone else in addition to his own. Neighbours no longer communicate as they once did. Maybe if politicians had told the indigenous population in the 1960s that they would have to pull together a bit more as they did during World War 2 instead of importing millions of immigrants which brought their own problems in their wake we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
-
My argument is that victims don't have a say.Why do you think that these tragedies are brought up year after year ? So that the general public remain reminded of the heinous crimes which took place and where justice was never served to these people.
ALL the victims of horrendous historic child abuse were never granted the justice that they deserved. I feel very strongly about this and my heart goes out to the poor souls who suffered at the hands of some who held positions in " high places ".
Where was it I read that " our justice system is a joke ?" It's that alright !
Bamber's relatives DID and you have criticised both them and the authorities for allowing it!
-
Bamber's relatives DID and you have criticised both them and the authorities for allowing it!
That's because I believe him to be innocent.
-
I agree that you can't extrapolate from one single country but being overpopulated doesn't help. Life has become inordinately stressful and the bin man is probably doing the work of someone else in addition to his own. Neighbours no longer communicate as they once did. Maybe if politicians had told the indigenous population in the 1960s that they would have to pull together a bit more as they did during World War 2 instead of importing millions of immigrants which brought their own problems in their wake we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.
Based on the amount of times our small island has been invaded, I'll hazard a guess that very few of us are pure anything, let alone Anglo Saxon. Certainly, by refusing more immigrants, it would enable subsequent governments to persuade into work those who would prefer not to, but I think more effort will need to go into keeping hold of those with good qualifications, rather than allowing them to emigrate to obtain better pay and life style. I clearly recall, whilst I was in college, being shown the large and colourful posters which were sent to various countries inviting them to come here. They showed a beautifully attired black lady, complete with tiara, standing in a modern and sparkling kitchen. There were her two, finely dressed children sitting round a table bearing, probably, more food than they'd see in a month in their own country. All illusion, of course. They ended up in Rachman type properties doing the work that we felt was beneath us. Don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting we should allow people free rein to come here as they choose without having jobs to go to -it's not allowed in Australia- but if people are willing to come over and contribute, I can't see why we'd wish to prevent it.
-
Bamber's relatives DID and you have criticised both them and the authorities for allowing it!
Oh! I seeeee! Lookout only agrees to relatives having an input if Lookout agrees that the defendant is guilty. Innocence or guilt comes down to whatever her gut says on that day. One has to pray she doesn't suffer digestive tract problems ;D
-
Based on the amount of times our small island has been invaded, I'll hazard a guess that very few of us are pure anything, let alone Anglo Saxon. Certainly, by refusing more immigrants, it would enable subsequent governments to persuade into work those who would prefer not to, but I think more effort will need to go into keeping hold of those with good qualifications, rather than allowing them to emigrate to obtain better pay and life style. I clearly recall, whilst I was in college, being shown the large and colourful posters which were sent to various countries inviting them to come here. They showed a beautifully attired black lady, complete with tiara, standing in a modern and sparkling kitchen. There were her two, finely dressed children sitting round a table bearing, probably, more food than they'd see in a month in their own country. All illusion, of course. They ended up in Rachman type properties doing the work that we felt was beneath us. Don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting we should allow people free rein to come here as they choose without having jobs to go to -it's not allowed in Australia- but if people are willing to come over and contribute, I can't see why we'd wish to prevent it.
..because the scale has increased exponentially. We just don't have the infrastructure to cope and life is stressful. You only have to look at house prices, class sizes, public transport, I could go on..
-
..because the scale has increased exponentially. We just don't have the infrastructure to cope and life is stressful. You only have to look at house prices, class sizes, public transport, I could go on..
I hear you, Steve. The problem I've previously encountered -re more doctors. Possibly the same applies in other areas- is that there haven't been enough people in a community to make viable an increase in whatever, but by the time there are enough, the resources are at breaking point.
-
That's because I believe him to be innocent.
Regardless, you should still support their right to have their say!
-
Regardless, you should still support their right to have their say!
Why should I ? In cases where there is rank corroboration going on,the answer is no ! So many lies spring to mind as well as issues which never come to light.
-
Once again this issue comes to the fore as the professionals now entrusted with the rehabilitation of the culprit decide on their course of action. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/12/alesha-macphail-father-sold-drugs-accused-trial-scotland
-
Based on the amount of times our small island has been invaded, I'll hazard a guess that very few of us are pure anything, let alone Anglo Saxon. Certainly, by refusing more immigrants, it would enable subsequent governments to persuade into work those who would prefer not to, but I think more effort will need to go into keeping hold of those with good qualifications, rather than allowing them to emigrate to obtain better pay and life style. I clearly recall, whilst I was in college, being shown the large and colourful posters which were sent to various countries inviting them to come here. They showed a beautifully attired black lady, complete with tiara, standing in a modern and sparkling kitchen. There were her two, finely dressed children sitting round a table bearing, probably, more food than they'd see in a month in their own country. All illusion, of course. They ended up in Rachman type properties doing the work that we felt was beneath us. Don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting we should allow people free rein to come here as they choose without having jobs to go to -it's not allowed in Australia- but if people are willing to come over and contribute, I can't see why we'd wish to prevent it.
I agree Jane. Many of my nearest and dearest are ethnically different to me. The British Isles is a melting pot and always has been, we are all mongrels. :)
-
This will set the debate alight in the country. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-47330774
-
"The killer’s demeanour in court was strikingly composed. While the other young people who took the witness stand to talk about their partying or Snapchat exchanges were palpably nervous, he remained neutral and articulate as he gave evidence for over two hours, refusing the breaks offered to him by the judge."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/21/mother-of-alesha-macphails-killer-led-police-to-his-door
-
I know it's dangerous to generalize but aren't a substantial percentage of young people today overstimulated, oversexualized, with the roots which held previous generations together fast withering away to be replaced by a combination of fantasy and drear reality as they seek to emulate the latest media star or the resources buy the latest gadget which may be in fashion?
-
I know it's dangerous to generalize but aren't a substantial percentage of young people today overstimulated, oversexualized, with the roots which held previous generations together fast withering away to be replaced by a combination of fantasy and drear reality as they seek to emulate the latest media star or the resources buy the latest gadget which may be in fashion?
Think that is very unfair on young people, Steve. The Daily Mail might pontificate like that but I believe young people today are a mixed bunch as they always have been and always will be. .
-
There doesn't seem to be any principle involved or accountability, but left to the judge's discretion in each case. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47721177
-
Another shocking case revealed today: https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2019/11/05/ireland-s-youngest-killers-15-sentenced-for-ana-kriegel-murder/
-
The public have a right to know who these individuals are as in most of these type of cases the criminal/s go on to reoffend after they've served their sentence.
This is an horrific case.
-
The public have a right to know who these individuals are as in most of these type of cases the criminal/s go on to reoffend after they've served their sentence.
This is an horrific case.
The public have no right to know who these individuals are, if the judge decides that in his professional position, they should remain anonymous.
You are massively and incorrectly generalising that ‘in most of these cases the criminals go on to reoffend.’ This is simply not true.
Recidivism is affected by numerous factors; maturity and progression to adulthood, being one of these.
-
The public have no right to know who these individuals are, if the judge decides that in his professional position, they should remain anonymous.
You are massively and incorrectly generalising that ‘in most of these cases the criminals go on to reoffend.’ This is simply not true.
Recidivism is affected by numerous factors; maturity and progression to adulthood, being one of these.
The problem is petey that judges have been far from consistent over the years, which does risk bringing the legal profession into disrepute.
-
The problem is petey that judges have been far from consistent over the years, which does risk bringing the legal profession into disrepute.
Each case is treated individually on its merits, but if you start discussing judges consistency over the years, that opens up another whole can of worms. Judges will make a professional decision on a case by case basis.
-
Each case is treated individually on its merits, but if you start discussing judges consistency over the years, that opens up another whole can of worms. Judges will make a professional decision on a case by case basis.
I'm sure that's the legal answer and I'd like to think it's true, though I suspect that there is pressure on judges from politicians via newspaper proprietors to provide them with a story.
The legal aspect: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47721177
How Norway dealt with one case: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/mar/20/norway-town-forgave-child-killers
I would only say that the lives of the perpetrators of such heinous crimes lie in ruins as soon as they are named and shamed. I'm not advocating they go free-far from it, but I think 15 years for a 10-year-old is sufficient, double the term the Bulger killers actually served.
-
I'm sure that's the legal answer and I'd like to think it's true, though I suspect that there is pressure on judges from politicians via newspaper proprietors to provide them with a story.
The legal aspect: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47721177
How Norway dealt with one case: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2010/mar/20/norway-town-forgave-child-killers
I would only say that the lives of the perpetrators of such heinous crimes lie in ruins as soon as they are named and shamed. I'm not advocating they go free-far from it, but I think 15 years for a 10-year-old is sufficient, double the term the Bulger killers actually served.
Interesting given the backlash against the killers of James Bulger being released before they served time in an adult prison.
Jon Venables clearly was not fully rehabilitated as he went on to commit further appalling crimes, resulting in his recall to prison on more than one occasion.
On the other hand Robert Thompson (obviously I have not seen all the available evidence) has to a certain extent had a successful period of rehabilitation in that he has been in no further criminal trouble since his release 18 years ago. Whisper it very quietly but can he be seen as an example of a success of the criminal justice system. (Obviously I’m not defending the horrific murder of James Bulger and the heinous injuries they inflicted on his body)
-
Interesting given the backlash against the killers of James Bulger being released before they served time in an adult prison.
Jon Venables clearly was not fully rehabilitated as he went on to commit further appalling crimes, resulting in his recall to prison on more than one occasion.
On the other hand Robert Thompson (obviously I have not seen all the available evidence) has to a certain extent had a successful period of rehabilitation in that he has been in no further criminal trouble since his release 18 years ago. Whisper it very quietly but can he be seen as an example of a success of the criminal justice system. (Obviously I’m not defending the horrific murder of James Bulger and the heinous injuries they inflicted on his body)
I think this is something of a dilemma. It's certainly something I agonize over. I emphatically believe children should be given ONE second chance, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't receive some form of punishment for the crimes they commit. I understand that Norway has a completely different mindset regarding dealing with child crime but such requires the cooperation of the entire nation. I don't believe it would work here. Having said that, I'm not entirely certain of what would, but I think it could begin with education, as in educating adults in parenting.
It's a generalization, but it seems to me that parents are often guilty of instructing children to do as they say, whilst demonstrating a quite different code of behaviour. It may help if adults were taught to say "NO" with conviction and reinforce it. Parents have no right to expect good and disciplined behaviours from children when all they see demonstrated is poor and undisciplined behaviours. Mixed messages cause confusion.
It's not a cure all. It's not a quick fix but everything must have a beginning. Children don't understand consequences. Especially so if they've never been taught that for every action there is a consequence. They don't come into the world with a handbook of instructions. WE, as parents, owe it to them to teach them BEFORE they reach school age, NOT blame teachers for being unable to do the job which should have been done at home.
-
Forgive me but I still don't see the rationale for some murderers who happen to be children not to be named by judges and others who are deemed fair game. Will Cornick's naming will serve as a deterrent to other like-minded youths-don't make me laugh. This type of teenager is looking for a fight most nights whilst enjoying the case of lager bought by their dad at the local Asda. And why were the Angela Wrightson killers not made an example of to other teenage girls: maybe because the victim was an alcoholic from Hartlepool, yet at trial the judge described the girls as "vulnerable", after they had subjected their victim to a five-hour torture. Why did the Edlington boys get anonymity but the Bulger killers not-was it because the former were in care at the time of the attacks and the judge didn't wish to antagonize Social Services?
I must read up on the Children and Young Persons Act 1933: maybe the truth lies therein.
-
Mary Bell was named back in 1968 when she was 10/11 for the heinous crime of murdering two toddlers in much the same way that Jamie Bulger was murdered.
-
I'm sure I'd like to know in case they eventually lived in the same street, or worse, next door !
-
Mary Bell was named back in 1968 when she was 10/11 for the heinous crime of murdering two toddlers in much the same way that Jamie Bulger was murdered.
Since when I believe her name and identity have been changed. I've heard she's now married with children. I wonder how that feels. She can't magically unhappen what she did. If she hasn't managed to forgive the child she was back then, I imagine there may be time when the guilt is overwhelming.
-
My argument is that because of the anonymity of criminals that it must happen that somewhere along the line they could be living next door to you. Many years could pass when suddenly you're going to find out somehow just by chance.
You're no longer going to think of them as having been good neighbours as they very well could have been-------all you're going to think about is the crime they've committed many years previously which will not only cloud the fact that they've been decent neighbours but you yourself by a very fact of nature that will change your mind about them and depending on your own personal thoughts about the type of crime they committed, you'll end up with a feeling of guilt for the rest of your life for having befriended someone who'd committed the most heinous of crimes.
Personally, I couldn't live with that. This is why I'd rather know and put a stop to the anonymity for the sake of the general public who shouldn't be hoodwinked in this way.
-
Forgive me but I still don't see the rationale for some murderers who happen to be children not to be named by judges and others who are deemed fair game. Will Cornick's naming will serve as a deterrent to other like-minded youths-don't make me laugh. This type of teenager is looking for a fight most nights whilst enjoying the case of lager bought by their dad at the local Asda. And why were the Angela Wrightson killers not made an example of to other teenage girls: maybe because the victim was an alcoholic from Hartlepool, yet at trial the judge described the girls as "vulnerable", after they had subjected their victim to a five-hour torture. Why did the Edlington boys get anonymity but the Bulger killers not-was it because the former were in care at the time of the attacks and the judge didn't wish to antagonize Social Services?
I must read up on the Children and Young Persons Act 1933: maybe the truth lies therein.
Slip ngb1066 a hundred quid and he will give you his unbiased opinion on the above (Paypal only accepted).
-
My argument is that because of the anonymity of criminals that it must happen that somewhere along the line they could be living next door to you. Many years could pass when suddenly you're going to find out somehow just by chance.
You're no longer going to think of them as having been good neighbours as they very well could have been-------all you're going to think about is the crime they've committed many years previously which will not only cloud the fact that they've been decent neighbours but you yourself by a very fact of nature that will change your mind about them and depending on your own personal thoughts about the type of crime they committed, you'll end up with a feeling of guilt for the rest of your life for having befriended someone who'd committed the most heinous of crimes.
Personally, I couldn't live with that. This is why I'd rather know and put a stop to the anonymity for the sake of the general public who shouldn't be hoodwinked in this way.
I HOPE I've misread this, but it sounds very much like you're saying that those who've committed "the most heinous of crimes" should not be granted anonymity because you couldn't live with the guilt you'd feel if you befriended them? I concur that to find out that a lovely, kind neighbour, who may have become a friend, had once been responsible for something unspeakable, would be an horrendous shock, but I HOPE, before I passed judgement, I'd base any conclusion on how they'd lived their life since I'd known them. As for feeling guilt? What they'd done, prior to coming into my life, has nothing to do with me, so unless they chose to tell me, it would be none of my concern. Any guilt I felt might come from knowing their secret.
-
I HOPE I've misread this, but it sounds very much like you're saying that those who've committed "the most heinous of crimes" should not be granted anonymity because you couldn't live with the guilt you'd feel if you befriended them? I concur that to find out that a lovely, kind neighbour, who may have become a friend, had once been responsible for something unspeakable, would be an horrendous shock, but I HOPE, before I passed judgement, I'd base any conclusion on how they'd lived their life since I'd known them. As for feeling guilt? What they'd done, prior to coming into my life, has nothing to do with me, so unless they chose to tell me, it would be none of my concern. Any guilt I felt might come from knowing their secret.
Wouldn't your imagination run amok at having eventually known of their crime, them being your neighbours, albeit decent and actually on occasion perhaps being entrusted with your children ? This is where the guilt would come in although in your mind, if you were human enough you'd still ask yourself " what if " . It's human nature to expect the worst and it definitely would prey on your mind for a long time to come. It would always be there.
Unless you've had any involvement with a murderer you wouldn't understand.
-
Can you believe this story..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/teenager-guilty-of-murdering-mother-of-two-and-burying-body-in-cemetery/ar-BB17SA2l?ocid=msedgntp
-
How utterly evil is this 17 year old ? Of course he murdered that poor woman. Nobody else was involved.
-
About time---the murderer has been revealed ! Let it continue regardless of age. If I were that poor woman's family I'd want his face to be shown around the world.
-
How utterly evil is this 17 year old ? Of course he murdered that poor woman. Nobody else was involved.
Not many surprises lookout: very low IQ, autism and ADHD diagnosis. Where did he get the idea of murder from? Does he know right from wrong? I assume he does or the M'Naghten rules come into play and he would end up in Broadmoor. https://www.lancs.live/news/lancashire-news/who-rocky-price-lindsay-birbecks-18748174
-
Not many surprises lookout: very low IQ, autism and ADHD diagnosis. Where did he get the idea of murder from? Does he know right from wrong? I assume he does or the M'Naghten rules come into play and he would end up in Broadmoor. https://www.lancs.live/news/lancashire-news/who-rocky-price-lindsay-birbecks-18748174
They’ve named him today.
-
Sentenced to life ? He should be sentenced to death !!
-
Sentenced to life ? He should be sentenced to death !!
I agree Lookout, his parents are fighting it, he was caught wheeling the body in a wheelie bin and said a man had paid him to get rid of the body. He’d never seen this man before and he never left the money.
-
I wish they'd stop using excuses like ADHD, Autism and a low IQ. Many people have these but don't use it as a passport to murder. Born evil, I'd have said.
It's only 12 months ago when a similar low-life dragged and killed a policeman along a road under the vehicle it was driving.
-
I wish they'd stop using excuses like ADHD, Autism and a low IQ. Many people have these but don't use it as a passport to murder. Born evil, I'd have said.
It's only 12 months ago when a similar low-life dragged and killed a policeman along a road under the vehicle it was driving.
s only 12 months ago when a similar low-life dragged and killed a policeman along a road under the vehicle it was driving.
How the jury fell for that one I will never know Lookout, 14 stone man being dragged and he said he didn’t know he was there, if a paper/plastic bag gets caught anywhere on your vehicle, you hear and feel it.
-
I wonder if he had a point to prove after his parents named him after the American boxer Rocky Marciano? He is certainly very strange (insane?). The parents are in denial. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8627271/Teenage-traveller-17-named-Rocky-Marciano-jailed-life.html
-
I wonder if he had a point to prove after his parents named him after the American boxer Rocky Marciano? He is certainly very strange (insane?). The parents are in denial. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8627271/Teenage-traveller-17-named-Rocky-Marciano-jailed-life.html
Makes you wonder Steve, they made a point that he was strong? A woman said she’d been lucky earlier with him prowling around. What is the world coming too, he even tried to saw her leg off.
-
I wonder if he had a point to prove after his parents named him after the American boxer Rocky Marciano? He is certainly very strange (insane?). The parents are in denial. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8627271/Teenage-traveller-17-named-Rocky-Marciano-jailed-life.html
Parents are bound to be insane too.
-
Another case here. I wonder what the criteria are for changing the stock "cannot be named for legal reasons" are? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/third-teenager-charged-with-murder-of-extremely-likeable-lad-who-was-found-in-churchyard/ar-BB180a2b?ocid=msedgntp
-
I like the letter from the person who calls him/herself " coolhand ". What a great answer to the increase in violence that we're seeing.
-
Does the public always have a right to know, will the naming and shaming act as a deterrent, will the publicity harm the chance of rehabilitation:
69% of child criminals go on to reoffend.
The Edlington Two granted lifelong anonymity: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-38263416
Angela Wrightson killers granted anonymity: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-47713853
Will Cornick named: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/03/will-cornick-leeds-ann-maguire-murdered-teacher-jail
-
The public have a right to know who they're living next door to or who prospective neighbours will be, so yes, these monsters should be named.
-
The public have a right to know who they're living next door to or who prospective neighbours will be, so yes, these monsters should be named.
100 per cent agree Lookout, there are ways of finding this out Lookout through the Police if you’re concerned, the danger is, if you tell anyone else about your neighbours past (if they have one) especially after being informed, you then would more than likely be charged with an offence yourself. I’m talking more about Sex offenders here though Lookout, I would imagine it might be the same in most cases?
-
100 per cent agree Lookout, there are ways of finding this out Lookout through the Police if you’re concerned, the danger is, if you tell anyone else about your neighbours past (if they have one) especially after being informed, you then would more than likely be charged with an offence yourself. I’m talking more about Sex offenders here though Lookout, I would imagine it might be the same in most cases?
There was a sexual element to the Edlington Two, who retained anonymity for some reason. I'm still not sure why some judges allow the names out and others err on the side of caution. I suppose if you're going back to a huge housing estate in Wythenshawe (or in their case Sheffield) there's always the risk of vigilantism.
-
There was a sexual element to the Edlington Two, who retained anonymity for some reason. I'm still not sure why some judges allow the names out and others err on the side of caution. I suppose if you're going back to a huge housing estate in Wythenshawe (or in their case Sheffield) there's always the risk of vigilantism.
Its sometimes and most likely to protect victims Steve, especially in sexual assault cases
-
Its sometimes and most likely to protect victims Steve, especially in sexual assault cases
Yes that's a good point Real justice. Quite often we focus too much on rehabilitation of the offender and forget the victims of their most heinous crimes.
-
One wonders who the victim of the crime really was..https://www.aol.co.uk/teenagers-tortured-murdered-vulnerable-woman-113503602.html
-
A shocking case. I imagine it'll only be a matter of time before the names are mentioned.
I couldn't help noticing the female Judge's name--- Mrs Justice Tipples and the poor woman who'd been murdered was an alcoholic.
Mr Justice Globe had a connection with one of JB's appeals I think, along with two other judges.
-
i think everybody should anomity theres no reason to name somone untill there convicted.
-
i think everybody should anomity theres no reason to name somone untill there convicted.
My understanding is that they were granted anonymity as teenagers but had to apply for lifelong anonymity when they turned 18. This wasn't just a spur of the moment crime with mitigating circumstances but a prolonged 7-hour torture. They were sentenced to a minimum of 15 years in 2016 and by the looks of things at least one of them currently is in no fit state to be released. https://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/crime/angela-wrightson-killer-attacked-detention-centre-staff-and-inmates-during-bad-behaviour-custody-3126124
-
Have we become inured to violence of this kind? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/boy-16-sentenced-for-shooting-15-year-old-in-face-at-close-range-as-he-walked-to-school/ar-AAQc48W?ocid=msedgntp
-
the one problem with anonimty and juvenile courts as you dont hear the procedings you have no idea weather the verdict was correct or not
like i asume that lad on the isle of bute was gulity but i cant say for certan becouse i dident get any of the evdence until afterthe conviction.
-
Have we become inured to violence of this kind? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/boy-16-sentenced-for-shooting-15-year-old-in-face-at-close-range-as-he-walked-to-school/ar-AAQc48W?ocid=msedgntp
Another entitled brat ! Does anyone think he'll be any different at 45 years of age----if he lives ? I hope he meets his match !!
-
Another entitled brat ! Does anyone think he'll be any different at 45 years of age----if he lives ? I hope he meets his match !!
Why on earth are young teenage boys walking the streets with guns and knives? We have never had this on such a scale before. It's time to reclaim the streets for the elderly, for women, for the ordinary, honest law-abiding citizen going about their business.
-
Should child offenders be granted anonymity?
No, because justice must always be done out in the open and public reporting of offending serves as additional chastisement. The exceptions are cases such as the Bulger killing, where it was clearly a mistake to allow the press and media to name them. That decision has made a long-running circus out of a tragic case and done no good.
Should child offenders, or any offender, continue to suffer detriment after due punishment is served?
Not in most cases, because to do so is contrary to natural justice, and it is in the wider interests of the community to allow rehabilitation.
-
Should child offenders be granted anonymity?
No, because justice must always be done out in the open and public reporting of offending serves as additional chastisement. The exceptions are cases such as the Bulger killing, where it was clearly a mistake to allow the press and media to name them. That decision has made a long-running circus out of a tragic case and done no good.
Should child offenders, or any offender, continue to suffer detriment after due punishment is served?
Not in most cases, because to do so is contrary to natural justice, and it is in the wider interests of the community to allow rehabilitation.
Your post doesn't make a lot of sense, firstly because the age of criminal responsibility is 10, so why make an exception in the Bulger case and not for other same-age perpetrators? Your last point doesn't really make sense either, because child criminals once released will be given a new identity away from their home area and if they have truly atoned for their crime and keep their head down they should not suffer detriment as you put it.
-
Your post doesn't make a lot of sense, firstly because the age of criminal responsibility is 10, so why make an exception in the Bulger case and not for other same-age perpetrators? Your last point doesn't really make sense either, because child criminals once released will be given a new identity away from their home area and if they have truly atoned for their crime and keep their head down they should not suffer detriment as you put it.
I find you quite grating. When you say I am not making sense, you are not being constructive, you are being insultative in that you are implying that I am not thinking coherently. I think you do understand what I am saying and you are doing this on purpose to annoy me. But let's assume you don't understand. I'm not sure what you expect me to do about your inability to understand, but perhaps if I try and spell it out for you, that might help you?
So let me try:
The exception should have been made in the Bulger case for very obvious reasons. It is a particularly notorious case and very many people become emotionally distressed, irrational and angry at things that don't directly concern them (as it happens, you are an example of this phenomenon, albeit in a different sort of way). This was demonstrated very well in the reception for the two culprits outside their first criminal court appearance, with grown men running at the custody van and attempting to intimidate them, all of it captured on film. Even today, people are still irrational about the case.
Looking at the situation overall, allowing the media and press to disclose their names and identities was not a sound decision. It created all sorts of undesirable unintended consequences. But that was an exceptional case and good law is not made on the basis of bad or exceptional cases. As a general rule, I do think disclosure should be made as a matter of course - even when the culprit is 10 years old - but as I have just explained, there are situations when, exceptionally, disclosure should be barred. When there are exceptional circumstances, it should be a decision for the judge to make.
Your second point overlooks that I am not just referring to notorious child criminals, whose identities may or may not be withheld, but to child offenders generally and also adult offenders as well, whose identities may have been made public. People should be punished for offending, but the punishment at some point has to stop. Information should still be retained and discoverable in newspaper archives and what not, but it should not be freely available to anybody who casually searches for a name or enquiries of a public body or even a private business, as that results in unfairness towards people who may be making efforts at rehabilitation.
Furthermore, your assumption that simply changing somebody's name and identity will be enough would only hold up if the offender is granted the dispensation of a new birth certificate, which would have to be exceptionally rare. Without that redux step, any past identity remains potentially disclosable to employers and other bodies who ask for such information, as well as enterprising individuals who develop suspicions and know how to conduct searches of the relevant public records.
I hope the above explains things. I would appreciate it if you could stop wasting my time. My posts are not directed at you and if they are not to your liking, you can ignore them, or you can ask me to clarify things. Thank you.
-
Can you believe this crime..https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newsmanchester/ten-teenagers-handed-life-sentences-for-murder-of-18-year-old-attacked-while-walking-home/ar-AA10lM1S?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=99908256af2645d4b6d2821f4ba357c6
-
And the law states that these ferals shouldn't be named ? I'd name them all if only to shame their parents for producing such sub-humans, then look for the resemblance in either parent !
-
I suppose we have to be grateful there was no violence involved. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62579788
-
This country has gone to the dogs..https://www.aol.co.uk/news/bowls-club-told-off-police-184831184.html
-
Pity the police hadn't anything better to do !
-
Pity the police hadn't anything better to do !
Are they doing their job? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62722082
-
Are they doing their job? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62722082
This is exactly what's going to happen,that people themselves are going to take the law into their own hands and gladly suffer the consequences of having tracked down the assailant and dealt with him/her.
-
This is exactly what's going to happen,that people themselves are going to take the law into their own hands and gladly suffer the consequences of having tracked down the assailant and dealt with him/her.
What is the role of police in modern Britain? https://youtu.be/sXsKz1chaU0
-
What is the role of police in modern Britain? https://youtu.be/sXsKz1chaU0
David Starkey is right.
-
With 40,000 stabbings in England alone this year I do wonder whether we as a society have become inured to violence. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/two-boys-stabbed-to-death-in-south-east-london/ar-AA14AKlY?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=e1314bae5f644a3b93a1d42430149d11
-
A nurse in the Lucy Letby trial today cannot be named for legal reasons, I assume because following the trial she will be resuming her professional duties. There's another case here where an adult cannot be named, I would have thought to protect the family and in particular the minors involved. https://www.aol.co.uk/news/mother-given-20-years-murder-135429436.html
-
Anonymity lifted, reinstated, lifted for the second time. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/baby-faced-killer-leighton-amies-26717970
-
Anonymity lifted, reinstated, lifted for the second time. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/baby-faced-killer-leighton-amies-26717970
It had to happen. Criminals, regardless of age. It's in their characters.
-
It had to happen. Criminals, regardless of age. It's in their characters.
Lookout, you should be a magistrate.
-
I'd be interested to know the interaction between judge and counsel in this particular case.
-
Lookout, you should be a magistrate.
Hahaha, I wouldn't have been popular that's for sure Roch.
-
What can be done to minimize the violence? https://www.msn.com/en-gb/video/webcontent/devastating-rise-in-teenagers-convicted-of-murder/vi-yprIHzzNuFQq7A?vid=ouUbjuaSfCA&provider=yt&ocid=msedgntp&cvid=b8dcdeb6b9ef4f18aa617774bfcb1552&ei=17
-
I hope this guy gets his just rewards in Jail, 6 years he should have got 20 years.
A paedophile police officer who recorded himself having sex with a teenage girl on her mobile phone after grooming her online has been jailed for more than six years. PC Luke Horner, 24, who is also an ex-soldier, travelled over an hour from his home to Rushden, Northamptonshire to attack the 13-year-old girl he had met on social media .
He went on to sexually assault the victim while off-duty by engaging in penetrative sexual activity, which he recorded video footage of on her mobile on June 11. The girl’s horrified mother later found the film on her daughter’s phone and called police who arrested the Thames Valley Police (TVP) officer.
-
There doesn't seem to be any rule or consistency, but solely at the judge's discretion. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/16-year-old-convicted-killers-of-transgender-teenager-in-england-named-in-court-ahead-of-sentencing/ar-BB1hFdC6?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=2403343f8b5942b1ace487a283606ae9&ei=11