Jon Venables back in prison

[David]

b) The sentence seems commensurate with the gravity of the offence.

Indeed it is, and like Lister said, it's quite a long time considering the crime.

 

I'd think his history will play a part in the conditions of his release once the two years are up, although i'm not really sure how much of that is our business.

 

Or Denise Fergus's.

[Tommy!]

I can't find it now but I read a piece the other day about the people who vet photos on some major upload site and apparantly few last more than six months or so.

 

Apparantly the UK system for the five levels is:

 

 

1) Nudity or erotic posing with no sexual activity

2) Sexual activity between children, or solo masturbation by a child

3) Non-penetrative sexual activity between adult(s) and child(ren)

4) Penetrative sexual activity between child(ren) and adult(s)

5) Sadism or bestiality

 

Level one has to have the child deliberately posed rather than just being a general snapshot.

 

Off topic massively but I used to sort of know some one who worked in the photo bit of boots who said it was amazing how many photos of people in the buff or a close up of some ones twat would come through she would have to bin when checking them. I don't know if its true but I'd like to think it was.

Anything potentially illegal would need reporting, apparently, if I recall right.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Tommy!

[Surf Digby]

Why would she bin them? As long as they're of consenting adults they should treat them as with every other photo? A bit rich coming from Boots who used naked children in their adverts in the 80s.

 

The bit that's going to cause a shitstorm in this, is that it's been confirmed that Venables breached his license prior to this, and no action was taken.

[Tommy!]

Why would she bin them? As long as they're of consenting adults they should treat them as with every other photo? A bit rich coming from Boots who used naked children in their adverts in the 80s.

 

She said it was something to do with regulations regarding decency on what they could print. Like I say it may not be true, I never actually spent the day with her at work and as any one who has had a conversation with me will attest to it can be hard work to make it interesting so it may be shit.

 

While I'm here I'll share, again, that I found two photos of a woman in the buff spread eagle on the bed in side my GAB92 VHS I bought from the NEC which was cosmic.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Tommy!

[David]

The Ministry of Justice is to review how Jon Venables, one of the young killers of James Bulger, was supervised after his release from custody in 2001.

 

The review follows revelations that Venables, who was yesterday jailed for two years for downloading and distributing child pornography, had been arrested twice for fighting and drug possession before he was recalled to prison earlier this year.

 

Former Home Office permanent secretary Sir David Omand will carry out the inquiry, which will examine the arrangements for the supervision of Venables, now 27, by probation, police and other agencies.

 

The review will evaluate whether appropriate action was taken or if he should have been sent back to prison for breaching the terms of his licence.

 

A curfew was imposed on Venables after he was arrested for a drunken fight in 2008. He was also found in possession of cocaine and was cautioned later that year.

 

It has also emerged that those who took the decision not to return Venables to custody for the offences may not have been aware of his real identity.

 

"The decision that was made at that time as to whether or not to charge him was made by people who didn't know his identity and indeed the same happened at his subsequent possession of cocaine," Diana Fulbrook, head of public protection for the Probation Chiefs' Association told Radio 4's Today programme.

 

"There was a decision made not to charge him because the evidence at the time wasn't clear who was actually involved in it," she added.

 

The ministry admitted that Jack Straw, then justice secretary, knew Venables had been arrested on both occasions in 2008 for cocaine possession and affray, but agreed with probation and police officials that he should not be recalled to prison.

 

The revelation enraged Bulger's mother, Denise Fergus. "We are surprised and concerned that he was not recalled under the terms of his parole licence" when he was accused of offences in 2008, she said through her solicitor .

 

Venables was arrested in February and recalled over child pornography allegations after images were found on his computer at his Cheshire home.

 

Forensic experts today questioned the rehabilitation programme that Venables received while in custody as well as the effectiveness of his supervision after his release.

 

David Holmes, senior forensic psychologist at Manchester Metropolitan University, cast doubt as to whether Venables was fit to be released from custody in 2001, eight years after the Bulger murder.

 

"He has committed minor offences in different areas

[Magnum]

He's obviously not someone who is going to go and live a respectable life upon release, is he?

 

When he ends up fucking up again upon release, perhaps someone will find out who he is before the authorities have the time to clean up his mess again.

 

Whilst I wouldn't condone such action of course, i'd certainly not be disappointed to read about his unfortunate demise in my morning newspaper.

 

Hopefully he'll just do away with himself this time round and save us a bit of money. With the tories lecturing us on all the areas we need to cut spending, I'd say 'new identities for Jon Venables' is one budget cut we could all live with.

 

Either that or put all these aliases to some use and make him a fucking spy.

[David]

With the tories lecturing us on all the areas we need to cut spending, I'd say 'new identities for Jon Venables' is one budget cut we could all live with.

 

Either that or put all these aliases to some use and make him a fucking spy.

[The King Of Swing]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

[Mandingo's Donger]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

 

Because you know what would happen if they didn't don't you.

 

Sure most people wouldn't care if it did but the Government can't really allow it can they.

[The King Of Swing]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

 

Because you know what would happen if they didn't don't you.

 

Sure most people wouldn't care if it did but the Government can't really allow it can they.

 

Regardless of the consequences there must come a time where the home office says enough is enough.

[Jonathan Ford]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

 

Because you know what would happen if they didn't don't you.

 

Sure most people wouldn't care if it did but the Government can't really allow it can they.

 

Regardless of the consequences there must come a time where the home office says enough is enough.

I doubt it. I suppose they could find some thin ice on which to detain him on a section if he continues to reveal his identity. I agree that its unsustainable to give him a new identity if he's planning on spending two our of every five years inside for the rest of his life.

[Surf Digby]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

According to one news source (I can't remember/be arsed to check which one) Thompson has had a "wobble".

 

Which one was it Denise reckons she found a couple of years ago after being tipped off?

[Glen Quagmire]

I just dont get why the government/home office are so determined to protect Venables.

 

Thompson I can understand since it "seems" he has kept out of trouble.

Now you're starting to get around my way of thinking...

[Keith Houchen]

There was a good piece by Barbara Ellen in The Observer this Sunday

Two significant people featured in the sentencing at the Old Bailey of Jon Venables last week. The first, obviously, was Venables, appearing via video link for his own safety, receiving two years for downloading and distributing indecent images of children, some as young as two, one showing the rape of an eight-year-old girl. Venables had also posed online as a mother selling her daughter to a paedophile for cash.

 

Terrible as all this was, the fact that Denise Fergus, previously Bulger, was also back in court, to watch, listen, "patrol", seemed positively heartbreaking. We all know who Denise is – the mother of two-year-old James Bulger, who was kidnapped, tortured and murdered by two 10-year-olds, Robert Thompson, and Venables – known initially as "Child A" and "Child B" – in Bootle, Merseyside, in 1993.

 

Her attendance at that trial was no surprise. Nor were her objections to the killers' 2001 release, and their false identities. However, with respect, these latest crimes were unconnected, and a solicitor represented James's father. Why was Denise sitting in the Old Bailey, with a "Justice for James" badge on her lapel? There is an impulse to think – go home, get some distance, please stop torturing yourself. But then you understand that, for her, standing lonely sentinel over her son's case may be the only way she has of not feeling powerless.

 

Questions are being raised about Venables now – from that ill-judged decision to make two children stand trial in an adult court, and the seemingly failed therapy, to Venables's non-convictions for assault and drugs since his release and his use of child pornography while under parole licence – the last discovered only when Venables reported that his identity was exposed, and police found him trying to destroy his computer hard drive with a tin opener.

 

A squalid series of events, but frankly I feel the onset of compassion fatigue. Venables is no longer "Child B", peeking pathetically over a dock that's too high for him. If anything, he's "Man X", for whose rehabilitation much effort was made, including a new identity. Now the best that can be hoped for Venables is that he accepts how disturbed he is, and refuses to be freed until he is genuinely better.

 

At least Venables will be dealt with, fretted over. What of Denise and other victims of crime, who are left mainly alone to flail in the aftermath? While the Victim Support charity does its best, a new government scheme to get offenders to interact with their victims does not sound suitable for serious crimes, and, in the main, talk is of less prison, not more.

 

Which is fine: most of us would prefer it if offenders were given second chances. However, something's very wrong when, 17 years on, James Bulger's mother still feels compelled to fight her late son's corner. Clearly, here is a woman who has lost faith in the system, and feels she must stand eternal panicky sentinel. Talk about a "life sentence". It's as if Fergus is suspended in the amber of her child's murder. But if she is, is it purely of her own doing?

 

It seems that with James Bulger's family, and other victims, there are still too many instances of them being abandoned, fobbed off, pushed aside. And people wonder why they go to the press. While Denise received considerable media and public attention, this is not the same as solid ongoing victim support, and rights.

 

Indeed, while Venables is being discussed, maybe we could also reassess the situation of the victims of crime – where is their government-sponsored intensive therapy-cum-support, their right to a fair hearing, and help to "move on"? Which seems to be the point. Jon Venables was given a new identity and will probably get another one. For Denise Fergus, James's death is her identity; her fight for "justice" is more than a badge on her lapel, it's her whole life. It seems high time to ask: would it have to be like this, if people like her believed they were served properly by the system?

[JNLister]

I liked the report today that Venables watches loads of kids TV and its as if "he never grew up properly".

 

Can't think why that would be.