Jon Venables back in prison

[The Icon]

You're right Frankie, in fact, I worry about which way this thread is heading.

[Mr. Seven]

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&a...id=345433536077

 

Facebook group getting trolled. Expect to see a story on this in the Mail.

[neil]

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&a...id=345433536077

 

Facebook group getting trolled. Expect to see a story on this in the Mail.

The trolling is pretty lame, but the reactions are hilarious.

[martyngnr]

Just a question for Quote the Raven, Quagmire and the rest of the "string em up" brigade.

 

Say the press get their wishes and are allowed to reveal his identity/whereabouts due to the latest allegation.

James Bulger's parents are informed of where both the killers live.

 

What then happens if Venables is innocent of the alleged offences?

[DJ Kris]

At various times this week the press have 'revealed' how Venables has been returned to prison because of kiddy porn, sexual assault, scrapping at work, drug abuse, returning to Merseyside or trying to contact Thompson.

 

In other words - they don't know.

I think this is it. What they're trying to do is throw so much shit out there that Jack Straw feels he has no choice but to reveal the truth.

 

That last couple of pages of this thread really made my head hurt. The amount of stupidly narrow minded comments has been unbelievable.

 

Just a question for Quote the Raven, Quagmire and the rest of the "string em up" brigade.

 

Say the press get their wishes and are allowed to reveal his identity/whereabouts due to the latest allegation.

James Bulger's parents are informed of where both the killers live.

 

What then happens if Venables is innocent of the alleged offences?

This is another reason why they need to keep his identity a secret. As someone else touched on, would he get a fair trial if the jury knew who he was?

Edited March 8, 2010 by DJ Kris

[Loki]

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&a...id=345433536077

 

Facebook group getting trolled. Expect to see a story on this in the Mail.

The trolling is pretty lame, but the reactions are hilarious.

 

The same could definitely be said of this thread.

[David]

If it was child porn that he's been hauled back in for, he'll be locked away for a long time probably, so what's the problem?

[patiirc]

Did anyone see Mrs Fergus's interview on This Morning?

 

I caught a snippit on the news@1 today... erm interesting

 

She demands this, she demands that, she has to know this, she has to know that... she cant say what she would like to do to them on TV. She cant cope and for some reason has taken her kids out of school?

 

Max Clifford at work again? (Yes, Iam cynical) Why all the need for the publicity and the anger and the outcry, surely it should be between Denise Fergus, the CPS (or Whomever), The Justice Secretary, whomever has been involved in what has caused his recall and..... thats it

 

I appreciate that what happened was wrong its a tragedy that her little boy was killed by two other little boys and that it was 17 years ago.

 

It will never stop hurting, I get that too.

 

But this is just making a circus out of it the Tories have got involved saying we should all have a right to know? Should we? Its got feck all to do with me its not in the purpose of the public interest for everyone to know is it?... Is it a morbid curiosity to have an 'I Told you so moment' 'I Knew 'ee was a wrong un' The papers can then come out claim they were morally justified all along and it will get worse from there.

 

I've already mentioned that this will likely prejudice any furture trial, good luck in finding a jury that has no knowledge over this, and if his new identity is released then the trial will be waved goodbye as it cannot possibly be 'fair', if instead he is then locked up he will just need to go back to the European court and he will be out again on appeal.

 

This is murky water, and could be bad times indeed. The papers are still smarting over the Maxine Carr, Madeline McCann knuckle wraps and want their quart of blood ' in the interests if the people (sic).

 

I await further developments with baited breath

[Gladstones Bitch]

Aye I saw that this morning, sick of the sight of her tbh she's been all over the tv & papers demanding allsorts. I totally agree with your post and I'm glad I'm not the only who feels that way.

[Glen Quagmire]

No, but then I'm against the death penalty full stop.

 

I'm not doing anything to your opinions. I'm just showing up your logic.

 

My logic does not extend to executing people that don't wear seatbelts in the car. My reasoning is that people who commit serious criminal offences like murder are highly likely to commit a serious offence again once they're released. The rotating prison system in the USA is a great example of this (watch some programmes like Lock Up or Louis Theroux's documentary on San Quentin to know how many prisoners there are serial offenders that learn nothing from being in prison, and how officers and wardens easily predict that once they leave prison as free men, it won't be the last time they see them). For fucks sake, not even North Korea puts a bullet through the head of a driver who's parking meter has just expired though I suppose through your trolling you'd think I'd like to see the Juche idea be adopted in Britain.

 

 

Of course you can answer it. To help you out i'll answer it from my pov then you can do the same: No i don't believe that to be true, i think that Venables and Thompson still would of killed James Bulger regardless of whther the death penalty was in practise at that point in time.

See, its easy, now you give it a try.

 

I clearly cannot give you a definite answer. No one can except maybe the two murderers themselves.

 

So you reckon the low crime rates in Japan are down to its use of the death penalty then?

 

Support for the death penalty to be applied to more convicted murders than is currently happening is growing in the country even when it has one of the lowest crime rates for a first world country. So I would say that yes, it is a factor. Obviously not the only one, but is still a factor.

 

The last poll carried out in the UK, last November, gives support for the death penalty to be an option at 70%. In JNLister's logic, by default seven out of ten people in the UK think teenagers caught spraying graffiti should be executed.

 

So you honestly, truly believe that the answer to the horrific murder of one child is to kill another two?

 

Loss of life for a loss of life and an eye for an eye. And no, it doesn't leave everyone blind, only those who are dead end up blind.

 

To me, killing two youngsters who commited such an incredible crime would be absolutely senseless. It gives us as a society no opportunity to understand why it happened, what motivated the boys to do what they did and to learn how we can prevent similar events occurring in the future.

 

Hanging Venables and Thompson would have made no difference compared to now in helping society "understand" why they killed a two year old boy for kicks. Do we as a society have any less understanding with these two murderers effectively walking free having spent eight years in a glorified Butlins camp?

 

Rather than dismissing the killers as being full of evilness and relegating the crime to the history books until the next time it happens, I would look at the perpetrators and try to change thins to avoid a repeat.

 

Join the bleedin' heart brigade then that hasn't learned a single thing from this failed social experiment from the 1960's onwards. An evil bastard is an evil bastard, all of whom once they pass a certain point cannot be rehabilitated.

 

And, with regard to your original point, if these allegations against Jon Venables are in fact true and he is found guilty of a crime, it would not vindicate executing he and Robert Thompson. While there are all these stories and rumours and speculation regarding Venables, there has been little or nothing (from what I have seen anyway) said about Robert Thompson. For all we know his rehabilitation has been much more successful than Venables's appears to have been.

 

If the stories that have surfaced about Venables are true, then it is perfectly valid that Thompson may have also breached his "licence" but hasn't been called back because he hasn't committed yet an offence that is serious. If Thompson is brought back in however at any point in the future, then that's it. Game Over.

 

It doesn't matter what age they were. At the least, they should have been locked up and never to be released again. If they were that fecked up in the head when they were 10, how fecked up are they going to be now?

 

All this bullshit, "they were only children!" FUCK THAT, pathetic. Evil little bastards.

 

+1

 

Some posters here I'm sure read in the tabloids of 11 and 12 year olds getting ASBOs and think that a nice cuddle would solve everything wrong about them.

 

Just a question for Quote the Raven, Quagmire and the rest of the "string em up" brigade.

 

Say the press get their wishes and are allowed to reveal his identity/whereabouts due to the latest allegation.

James Bulger's parents are informed of where both the killers live.

 

What then happens if Venables is innocent of the alleged offences?

 

Well neither of the two murderers should have been given new identities and millions of pounds of the tax payers expense in the first place. Jamie's mother has already known the new identity of one of the murderers but could not approach him out of anger. If it came that his current identity was released (photo, "new" name etc.) before he was released of any "alleged" offence he committed, then I am sure that Jon Venables would be remaining in prison for a long time to come.

 

I thought about last night what would happen if Jon Venables' "new" identity was leaked out over the internet and that the UK Authorities couldn't do a thing about it either because it was a foreigner living overseas that made it public that the UK couldn't touch (unless they sent in the SAS), or a mass identifying as was the case of the Baby P, over the next few days? The result would be that while it could be claimed that it would be impossible for Venables to get a "fair trail" because of information leaking out into the public domain, trials can now be heard in England without a jury present, therefore it would be possible for a trial to take place. Even if that wasn't the case, he would likely still be locked up for at least some time if only for his own safety - there is no way Jack Straw, so close to a General Election, would allow the sanctioning of a second new anonymity case be prepared costing lots of taxpayers money unless he wants to lose his MP seat and I don't see the Conservatives being keen in granting it if they won. So in my book, a partial result. A better result would see him never leaving prison again.

 

If it was child porn that he's been hauled back in for, he'll be locked away for a long time probably, so what's the problem?

 

A "long time" would not be long enough Harry I'm afraid unless his life ended behind bars.

[Glen Quagmire]

Did anyone see Mrs Fergus's interview on This Morning?

 

No rational person would say that Denise Fergus should not have the right to access details of the murderers of her son.

 

But this is just making a circus out of it the Tories have got involved saying we should all have a right to know? Should we? Its got feck all to do with me its not in the purpose of the public interest for everyone to know is it?

 

Imagine the reaction if either Venables or Thompson were outed here on UKFF as regular posters.

 

Aye I saw that this morning, sick of the sight of her tbh she's been all over the tv & papers demanding allsorts. I totally agree with your post and I'm glad I'm not the only who feels that way.

 

Just be thankful that if you have a young son or daughter that you still have them every time you go to bed at night. Denise Fergus must be wondering what she done wrong to end up in the position she is in and she deserves the answers to any questions she is asking in this matter. End of.

[JNLister]

No, but then I'm against the death penalty full stop.

 

I'm not doing anything to your opinions. I'm just showing up your logic.

 

My logic does not extend to executing people that don't wear seatbelts in the car. My reasoning is that people who commit serious criminal offences like murder are highly likely to commit a serious offence again once they're released. The rotating prison system in the USA is a great example of this (watch some programmes like Lock Up or Louis Theroux's documentary on San Quentin to know how many prisoners there are serial offenders that learn nothing from being in prison, and how officers and wardens easily predict that once they leave prison as free men, it won't be the last time they see them). For fucks sake, not even North Korea puts a bullet through the head of a driver who's parking meter has just expired though I suppose through your trolling you'd think I'd like to see the Juche idea be adopted in Britain.

 

 

Not sure how many times this had to be said. You say Venables reoffending retrospectively justifies his execution because it would have stopped the second offense. I say, following that same logic, that anyone committing a minor offense going on to murder retrospectively justifies them being executed for the minor offense.

 

The only difference is that while we both use the same fundamental logic, my clearly ridiculous example kills an adult to prevent a murder, while your supposedly sensible suggestion kills a child to prevent a currently unknown alleged offence which may be downloading child porn.

 

Oh, and as my example is hypothetical, the seatbelt evader in my example goes on to murder a child. And don't tell me no child murderer has ever driven without a seatbelt.

 

So we're both using your dumbass logic, but I've hung an adult and saved a child. You've hung a child and stopped a download.

[ReturnOfTheMack]

No rational person would say that Denise Fergus should not have the right to access details of the murderers of her son.

 

 

I'd say she should be about the last person who should know, what with her having reason to hate them and want revenge. What else could she get out of it?

[patiirc]

Glenn, re-read my post regarding your first point, seriously, you may have missed something.

 

Secondly, What if the two people were posters on here? Whats the issue? What are you trying to be agent provocateur about?

 

The Baby P thing you mentioned is yet another example of the press flexing its muscles to cause near panic and hysteria, to the point where Everyone involved in the social work and hospital side of things has afaik been made an example of because the case as been made public and everything has been made known.

 

Any misdemeanour has been set upon and those who have worked at Harringay Social Services whether involved in the case or not have had their careers wrecked by association to the 'Baby P' case, whether they were involved or not. Anything now associated with that case, including specifically, people who worked in the department but would have had little or no knowledge of Baby P and the case details are now a 'poisoned chalice', all because of righteous sense of justice.

 

 

You say want that kind of 'justice' in this case? Why? What 'good' could it possibly bring?

[Glen Quagmire]

No, but then I'm against the death penalty full stop.

 

I'm not doing anything to your opinions. I'm just showing up your logic.

 

My logic does not extend to executing people that don't wear seatbelts in the car. My reasoning is that people who commit serious criminal offences like murder are highly likely to commit a serious offence again once they're released. The rotating prison system in the USA is a great example of this (watch some programmes like Lock Up or Louis Theroux's documentary on San Quentin to know how many prisoners there are serial offenders that learn nothing from being in prison, and how officers and wardens easily predict that once they leave prison as free men, it won't be the last time they see them). For fucks sake, not even North Korea puts a bullet through the head of a driver who's parking meter has just expired though I suppose through your trolling you'd think I'd like to see the Juche idea be adopted in Britain.

 

Not sure how many times this had to be said. You say Venables reoffending retrospectively justifies his execution because it would have stopped the second offense. I say, following that same logic, that anyone committing a minor offense going on to murder retrospectively justifies them being executed for the minor offense.

 

The only difference is that while we both use the same fundamental logic, my clearly ridiculous example kills an adult to prevent a murder, while your supposedly sensible suggestion kills a child to prevent a currently unknown alleged offence which may be downloading child porn.

 

Oh, and as my example is hypothetical, the seatbelt evader in my example goes on to murder a child. And don't tell me no child murderer has ever driven without a seatbelt.

 

So we're both using your dumbass logic, but I've hung an adult and saved a child. You've hung a child and stopped a download.

Your problem is that you have successfully outsmarted yourself to the point where you cannot tell the difference in morality of a driver not wearing a seatbelt and someone who tortures and murders two year old boys. There is no point going any further on this matter with your mong logic.

 

No rational person would say that Denise Fergus should not have the right to access details of the murderers of her son.

 

 

I'd say she should be about the last person who should know, what with her having reason to hate them and want revenge. What else could she get out of it?

 

I would say effective justice against those who murdered her child. If Jamie Bulger's murderer had been over 18 at the time of the killing, the murderer would almost certainly still be in jail right now.

Edited March 8, 2010 by Glen Quagmire