Of course, this is the main case that is in the news right now and everyone is throwing their opinions in left, right and centre in other places so I thought I might as well throw mine in here.

I know that what he did to James Bulger was awful and I know that the child porn he was looking at was awful and he has no excuse - nor has he offered one. And I'd like to say that the tabloid media have surprised me with their reaction to it but sadly, they haven't. We've been getting the usual "evil!" and "monster!" emotive bullshit thrown at us and I believe it was either the Mirror or the News Of The World who ran a headline saying that he bragged about it (James' murder) to friends when the article says that he did nothing of the sort. He told a friend about it in confidence while drunk and possibly stoned and dropped hints to others, seemingly wanting to get it off his chest.

And another article, with the same emotive language about "sick" Jon Venables "bragging with his feet up" that he'll be out in two years by some un-named guard. Considering he's happy to do his sentence, took massive risks to get caught and was actually caught trying to dig his hard-drive out of his computer suggests he wanted to be caught.

So that begs the question, was it a good idea to pitch an immature 18 year old straight out into the world with a new identity and no time to get used to it? It seems his co-defended Robert Thompson, one or two minor wobbles aside if rumours are to be believed, has managed to cope with it but Venables was the most immature of the two. Did he get the help he needed? Is the system at fault as well?

I just tire of the "OMG, he's an evil monster, he killed James, he should be killed!" angle on this when there are far more pressing questions about rehabilitation and the reaction to him (which warrants giving him a new identity) to be asked.

He seems to have real problems that need to be addressed and have not been thus far.
IF it is correct that his computers only came to police notice after he contacted them because he thought his new identity had been breached, then it does indicate to me that he has the same kind of self absorption that many criminals have. Sod his victims but worry about himself.
I do wonder if by giving him a new identity, no matter how well intentioned, that this has kept his profile higher in the public eye than it ordinarily would have been? But I can see why the authorities couldn't take the chance of him being released without a new ID.

Well what venables has been caught for now he deserves his punishment as an adult.

What he did as a 10 year old he did as a child, therefore, he should be deemed not fully responsible for his actions.

Holly and Jessica were 10 when they were murdered by Ian Huntley. Of course, using the same bile based logic that is directed at Thompson and Venables, these arseholes who think that they should have been treated as adults are are also safe to presume that Holly and Jessica could have led Huntley on......

_________________
You may say I'm a dreamer.... but I'm not the only one....

I do dislike the way they keep wheeling Denise Bulger out for a quote at every opportunity. It's all too reminiscent of the way reporters used to doorstep Lesley Anne Downey's mother whenever Hindley or Brady hit the news. It can't be helping her or her other children, and it tends to make people lose respect for her.

Some reports say she was even at the court for the judgement the other day. That seems a little obsessive to me.

_________________
"Even when you're a super-computer with an IQ of 2000 it's brown trousers time."

Reclaiming "methinks" for the nation

Latest blog post - 2011 - a review (updated 07/10)

It does happen; I'm still a little obsessed with what's happened to my ex - please don't think I'm comparing that to having your kid murdered though. I think there's a longing to find out what they are doing - after all, you've hated them for so long. First, after they've been arrested, you scour the news to find out all the information you can as to what happened. Then, there's a long build up to the trial...you hate them, but there's always the possibility that they may be innocent. Then the trial, and you find out for sure that they're guilty and have caused such disruption to your life...and the details all come out as they're reported in the press. After that, you have to wait for sentencing - more uncertainty: what will they get?

And once that's done, there's nothing more for you to ponder. There'll be no more reports in the media, no more 'how long will they get?/Are they guilty?" to think about when you lie awake at night. It leaves a gap, of something that has been a huge part of your life for the past 6 months, year, whatever. And the people who weren't so directly involved have moved on, so you don't talk to them. So there has to be some way of filling that. Maybe it's a control thing. I keep searching news sites to see if there have been updates, or re-read stories, or even see if they are going to release them (even though that's not happening for another few years and I KNOW that). Maybe I need to know that after having them affect my life so badly, that I am now in control and know what's going to happen. I talk about the incident if I bring up the subject, but I don't like people bringing up the subject to me. Hypocritical, I know, but I like to have the buffer of knowing I'm talking about it, and I can keep it at arm's length.

So it's quite possible for Denise Bulger to be the same...although take it further so as to attend further trials. It doesn't surprise me. Again, I'm not going to say I understand what it's like to have your child murdered, but I find it easier to get into the mindset of someone who's life has been turned upside down by one (or two) people.

I can quite see that it's not surprising that Denise Bulger obsesses about Thompson and Venables. What I object to is that the media do everything they can to keep it that way: I suspect that they're on the phone even before she knows about any developments, putting whatever has happened in the worst light and asking her how bad/furious she feels about it. None of it is done out of any genuine concern for her, and it can only be feeding the obsession which, apart from anything else, can't be good for her other kids.

Yeah. her three year old child was murdered in cold blood by someone who later is convicted for another horrific crime, she should clearly just let it drop and forget all about him.

this, muchly.

i think it was the news of the world who several years ago belived they had found one of the boys (i forget which one) and accompanyed her to, essentially, spy on him as he went about his business. they repoted back her thoughs on him, his having cold evil eyes and so on, of course, they had no idea if this really was either thompson or venables, or just a random person of the right age.
utterly pointless, of zero public interest, and not to forget, cruel.

_________________
i have an art blog: http://procrastinationathon.blogspot.com/
and a review blog: http://blindwithwoodenhands.blogspot.com/
double blog! what does it mean?

Yup, I agree!

I don't think anyone has suggested for one minute that Denise Bulger should forget about her son. However, there is a difference between that and turning up (with press cameras attending in droves) at the trial of one of the perpetrators for a different offence 20 years later. How many victims or relatives of victims do that? Can it really help her or her family?

Surely by following their every move to the nth degree all you're doing is making it worse for yourself? Who said anything about "forgetting" anyway? Someone who spends a whole life hating is doing themselves absolutely no favours. What happened to Bulger was dreadful, but it strikes me she has had difficulty moving on, which suggests some form of mental issue which isn't helped by the media. Savvy?

Or have I stumbled onto Facebook by mistake with emotional anger spewing all over the place?

_________________
"Even when you're a super-computer with an IQ of 2000 it's brown trousers time."

Reclaiming "methinks" for the nation

Latest blog post - 2011 - a review (updated 07/10)

I think its very dangerous to judge the mental state of someone who we have never met. Particularly when their anguish is so difficult to determine due to media manipulation

_________________
'Because we've reached the limits of what rectal probing can teach us'

I think Esqui's post is a fine example of how to disagree with another poster on a forum. Gets his point across in a clear, considered way and he's not spoiling for a nark by being sarky or antagonistic. Good post.

I wonder if Baroness Newlove will soon have a companion in the Lords?