James Bulger killers - should they have been freed when they were?

It seems to be common knowledge amongst our Oz cousins that Jamie's killers are both living in Australia and are both getting married.

I recently had some visitors from Oz stay at our house and they were talking about it. I found this comment on a website for Brit ex-pats:

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=194460

Did anyone know that the Jamie Bulger killers have a new life in Sydney??
All the Aussies know out here, but funny that we in the UK were not told a thing.

Why should they now be able to live free in OZ when most of the UK couldnt obtain the points for trying. They have been well educated so they will be able to get decent jobs.

THE SYSTEM IS ALL SCREWED UP

Incidentally, there was another notorious case of a young girl called Mary Bell (I think) who committed some cruel murders of kids when she was ten. She was subsequently released and leads a perfectly normal life as a wife and mother...rehabilitation is possible, it seems.

Edit: It was Mary Bell; I've just found this link to the murders. There'll be lots of stuff with more info on the web if anyone wants to know anything else about the case.
http://www.murderuk.com/child_killers_mary_bell.html

Reply 44

Ferrus

19

Because legally children are not regarded as having the same mental awareness as adults and thus it is considered unjust to punish an adult for felonious actions taken committed at such an age. For sure, if you punish them like adults - but then change the laws which deny children access to various media, make children fully punishable for adult crimes and sent them to adult prisons.

A similar case to this occurred in the 19th century. As the author noted, the Victorians had many faults but at least they did not make saccharine icons of dead children, and did not let emotivism impede justice, even if their justice was markedly harsh. In that case the criminals were released at 18 and they joined the army, and were unheard of again.

Reply 45

yawn

Ferrus

Because legally children are not regarded as having the same mental awareness as adults and thus it is considered unjust to punish an adult for felonious actions taken committed at such an age. For sure, if you punish them like adults - but then change the laws which deny children access to various media, make children fully punishable for adult crimes and sent them to adult prisons.

A similar case to this occurred in the 19th century. As the author noted, the Victorians had many faults but at least they did not make saccharine icons of dead children, and did not let emotivism impede justice, even if their justice was markedly harsh. In that case the criminals were released at 18 and they joined the army, and were unheard of again.

That beggars the question, Ferrus

Were they as much victims as their victim?

Reply 46

Ferrus

19

yawn

Were they as much victims as their victim?

No. They were victims of a sort, but evidently not to the same scale as the child mudered. However - the important thing in this is justice, justice should go above the braying crowd of idiots and punish approriately, but be unimpeachably equitable, as much as is possible. If the media wants to replace the rule of law with emotional bull**** then they can **** off.

Reply 47

Sorani

16

I can't help but agree with some people that they were only children and from a horrible background even though what they did was absoloutely dreadful.

I don't condone what the boys did and in no way do I think that childhood neglect or abuse is an excuse for the behaviour but it is a genuine explanation and I believe that if they were pulled out of that horrible place early in their lives, even though it's had to lead to tragedy for others, then they could genuinely reform themselves at this point. Mary Bell is probably the best example of recovery.
If only we could discover and pull children out of these situations before tragedy strikes then we wouldn't have to deal with these things.

Reply 48

Mikesev

The simple point remains that there are thousands of children across the country who live under conditions at least as bad as those two. There must have been some other factor that manifested itself in this case, surely?

Reply 49

cottonmouth

Mikesev

The simple point remains that there are thousands of children across the country who live under conditions at least as bad as those two. There must have been some other factor that manifested itself in this case, surely?

Not least they had siblings who had the very same upbringing. I doubt many people are saying that what they did was solely a prodcut of terrible upbringing; more that it didn't help, and most, that it helped lead to.

Reply 50

more adventurous

With just one post, you've proved that you're exactly the same as them.

Well done.

Moron.

When it is your child, tell him he is 'the same as them'.

It is people like you with your book-worming, knee-jerk opinions that have melted societal order in the UK. I agree with *the majority* of the post above you - Maybe not the punishments but certainly the disdain.

Reply 51

la fille danse

I was obviously referring to the punishments, not the disdain, moron. :rolleyes:

Tell me: how, exactly, is an adult who would happily murder a young child more moral than a child who murders another child?

Reply 52

more adventurous

I was obviously referring to the punishments, not the disdain, moron. :rolleyes:

Tell me: how, exactly, is an adult who would happily murder a young child more moral than a child who murders another child?

Tell me: Did you read his post? He gave specific age ranges detailing punishments for that age. Not death as a child.

Those children should have been locked up for 10 years, and then, only then, given according punishments.

Reply 53

la fille danse

You're still murdering someone for something they did AS A CHILD. Oh, so you just cut all their limbs off as children? How very kind.

And you called my post a knee-jerk reaction. :rofl:

Reply 54

more adventurous

You're still murdering someone for something they did AS A CHILD. Oh, so you just cut all their limbs off as children? How very kind.

And you called my post a knee-jerk reaction. :rofl:

No. I said it was a knee-jerk opinion.

I couldn't care less if they were toddlers (in this case they were far from it) - the Justice system states knowing the difference between RIGHT and WRONG. They were at satisfactory level of aptitude to distinguish between the two. They are murderers. They killed James because in the unlikely, unfortunate circustance of two inately psychotic, downright coldblooded *individuals* meet, an insidence of this unimagianable INHUMANE act must be dealt with accordingly, swiftly and for the wider protection of HUMANISM.

They murdered intently. They ought to be removed from Society as a result. It is possibly the most simple formula, ever.

Reply 55

la fille danse

Do you feel the same way about all murderers, or just these two?

It's kinda funny how people, including children, get murdered every single day - but when it's an adult who does the killing, it's just another news story. But when a child does the killing, obviously they should be cruelly tortured and killed. Why do child killers get a worse rep than adult killers?

The justice system also states that the death penalty is illegal, FYI. :rolleyes:

Reply 56

more adventurous

Do you feel the same way about all murderers, or just these two?

It's kinda funny how people, including children, get murdered every single day - but when it's an adult who does the killing, it's just another news story. But when a child does the killing, obviously they should be cruelly tortured and killed. Why do child killers get a worse rep than adult killers?

The justice system also states that the death penalty is illegal, FYI. :rolleyes:

I feel this way about all coldblooded murders, peadophillia and extreme cases of serial rape.

If this was two children playing and they pushes James into an oncoming train, I agree that they committed a murerous act, but they were not cruel*. To do what these kids did (batteries, paint, etc) and then treat the toddler as a piece of meat, is beyond HUMAN acceptability - they must be LIQUIDATED immediately to suffice our existance as a civilized people.

*Cruel in the sense of murdering James with intent of causing emotional and physical toil and humiliation, as they did.

Reply 57

bubu

IMO they shouldnt have been let out people are mentioning they was children when they did it they should have a normal life as a adult why? jamie aint gonna have a adult life and his parents aint going to have a normal life knowing there sons killer is out on the streets somewere

ive reed what they did that papers couldnt print because it was horrific and i felt physically sick, maybe there parents should have been questioned on why they did it since "they didnt understand"

you'll seem to think 10years olds dont know what they was doing but no matter how you was brought up you know what right and wrong is i sure knew at 10.

and since they bring up how they was treated bad at home they knew exactly what was right and wrong.

the people i feel sorry for is there partners and there children and ofcourse jamies parents

Reply 58

_jackofdiamonds

OP

more adventurous

It's kinda funny how people, including children, get murdered every single day - but when it's an adult who does the killing, it's just another news story. But when a child does the killing, obviously they should be cruelly tortured and killed. Why do child killers get a worse rep than adult killers?

The media doesn't pick up on all child killers. I found out from my law tutor who knew someone that worked in their children's offenders unit thing, there were kids in their of all sorts, arsonists, murderers. One stabbed his sister to death for hogging the PlayStation. The difference is that what Thompson and Venebles did was so twisted and unusual, for any sort of killer, child or adult, that of course it would have been picked up on.

Reply 59