James Bulger Killer Jon Venables back in Prison

[gmac]

His claim seemed to be that they weren't punished at all. Clearly a nonsense.

 

I would ask why Srontium and the like are all so convinced that their own views are the only ones which are correct, for example – they are in a minority on this point.

 

Strontium also states: Bear in mind though that I don't for one second believe that a justice system should be there to punish anyone. Number one priority should be protecting society from a transgressor.

 

To my mind some contradiction there, maybe I can highlight how I feel from my experience, slightly off topic maybe but I live in a shit part of Huyton, loads of demo work going on, last night saw gang of knobs in hoods kicking down fencing surrounding service digs, few weeks ago went outside to find three going through boot on car – what did I do – fuck all because of the fact they know they can get away with anything and would be my windows put in later.

 

The type of thinking which pervades Scrotiums posts contribute to why my life and the lives of people in my immediate area are so blighted, there is no deterrent and because of this there is no protection, they say locking up / punishment doesn’t work, well fuck me if I remember what it was like when I was being brought up to what areas are like now it works a damn sight more than the shit liberal attitude that now pervades. Scrotium and co. should get their stupid (knob) heads up out of their sociology text books and enter the real world.

 

Back on subject, remember seeing Ralph Bulger in Kirby Centre, sticks in my mind because fuck did I feel sorry for him, (maybe Scrotium and his pals could travel to Kirby and explain to the parents that 8yrs in a young offenders institute was more than enough and to leave the boys alone), they have never received justice for their little boy, I just hope they don’t go to their graves this way and that someday someone catches up with these cunts to give them closure.

[RJ Fan club]

Rehabilitation does not work it's flawed as a concept. We may as well brutally torture every convicted person.

 

Speaking as a man with a completely clean record and not even a single parking ticket in his life, I call for all speeding motorists to have their legs chopped off. Then perhaps we could move on to the convicted child thieves; lobbing their hands off is too good for them, let's go with acid over the face.

 

Fuck it, let's not stop at criminality. I'm debt free, so let's take the first born of everyone in debt and make them till the land till the debt is paid.

[Moo]

I just can't get that some people don't comprehend that the treatment a child recieves can actually change their brain. If you'd lived their lives there is a very good chance you'd be doing the same things as them. I know people don't like to think about that because they think they're better than that and that personal choices overpower the million ripples of cause and effect that our environment hits us with to shape our behaviour.

 

I think it's a tragedy that little Bulger got tortured but that doesn't mean I can't look at the two kids that did it and also think it was a tragedy that their parents were allowed to fuck them up so badly and create such heartless monsters.

 

I could have a child and spend all of my waking time training it to be an evil little killing machine and when I unleashed it a lot of people wouldn't see it as a victim, how fucked up is that?

 

 

Not sure how black and white you're seeing this but do you really think Venebles and Thompson had the worst possible upbringing, worse than virtually any other child in this country in the previous 30 years?

I'd say there were many many kids who had an equally bad, if not worse, uprbinging than those two who didn't even give a passing thought to torturing and killing a 2 year old, never mind actually committing such a heinous act.

[Section_31]

Not sure how black and white you're seeing this but do you really think Venebles and Thompson had the worst possible upbringing, worse than virtually any other child in this country in the previous 30 years?

I'd say there were many many kids who had an equally bad, if not worse, uprbinging than those two who didn't even give a passing thought to torturing and killing a 2 year old, never mind actually committing such a heinous act.

 

Agreed, it's nature and nurture combined. I've got a mate who was abused, his mum was an alcoholic before she died and he's been looking out for himself for years, but he's utterly flawless - a flawless human being, the nicest and kindest person you could ever meet with a successful business of his own.

 

There will be some people who react to adversity with anger and rage and others who will turn inwards and say 'fuck you world, you won't grind me down' and try and become better people. For every Malcolm X there is a Martin Luther King.

[Dirk]

Agreed, it's nature and nurture combined. I've got a mate who was abused, his mum was an alcoholic before she died and he's been looking out for himself for years, but he's utterly flawless - a flawless human being, the nicest and kindest person you could ever meet with a successful business of his own.

 

There will be some people who react to adversity with anger and rage and others who will turn inwards and say 'fuck you world, you won't grind me down' and try and become better people. For every Malcolm X there is a Martin Luther King.

 

If only it was simple. The genetic factors which sound most plausible are the fact that certain alleles confer an increased risk to maladjusted behaviour when exposed to certain environmental conditions.

 

If it's nature and they were born that way, then it's not their fault is it? I mean, people can't realistically expect a 10 year old boy, or any other human, to overcome the power of natural selection can they?

 

I know this example is not completely related to the Bulger case but it does outline the role of environments in psychological development.

 

"It's not clear if it is birth in cities, or upbringing in cities, but there is something about city living that increases risk," he said. Where you are born and brought up is a larger contributing factor to risk than genetic predisposition. Indeed, 34.6% of schizophrenia cases would be prevented if people were not born and brought up in cities, compared to 5.4% of cases that would be prevented if people did not have parents or siblings who suffered from the illness, Susser told participants at the New York conference (2004).

 

Children whose mother's reported the pregnancy as unwanted are statistically more likely to develop schizophrenia. It's fallacious reasoning to say that because not all unwanted pregnancies result in schizophrenia therefore unwanted pregnancy is not implicated in schizophrenia. It clearly is. Up to 70% of schizophrenics report childhood abuse. Yet, the psychiatric community like to peddle schizophrenia as a disorder of biological origin.

 

Inconsistent parenting methods are implicated in the development of major depression too. Parents who are cold to their children but are also controlling, inflate the risk of their children developing depression in later life considerably. It's not just parents that fuck up their kids either. It can be other family members, or incidents in early childhood with other non-family members. Take the example of schizophrenia above, one of the most plausible explanations of why there are less cases of schziophrenia in urban areas is because people are less likely to be persecuted or bullied in childhood in rural areas. The difference in population dictates that. It's not too difficult to make the leap between early childhood experiences of persecution and the later onset of persecution delusions.

 

Let's be absolutely clear here, people don't become mentally ill because they lack the capacity to pull themselves together or because they choose not to become angry. I know that was never your intention but I find that idea offensive.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Dirk

[Boomshakalaka]

This is a mighty controversial topic. Talk about stating the obvious. Some want him shot, others say back to jail, others think let him off this minor indiscretion.

 

For me it does not matter. The one thing that really blows my mind is the frenzy surrounding this news. The lad has a new identity, a screw loose and has made an error once he had been seen to have punished adequately (a completely different debate) and for justice to have been done.

 

Hopefully the lad over those eight years was rehabilitated - one nil to the system as he has not been caught doing anything wrong since his release eight years ago. Now apparently he has returned to Liverpool and got drunk (my guess asI have not been following the story). Even worse he has got caught.

 

The first signs of a not entirely rounded individual but this could be down to something very normal in a lad: the seeking of a rush.

 

Personally, and I know this is going to annoy, I think we should let the system deal with this and all shut up. Yes, things can never be the same, yes, what they did was horrendous, and, yes, people still have the right to be angry. Yet the boys were seen to hae been repaired and unfortunately have the right to live a life as they have served their punishment. A punishment for a crime committed when they were so young they can hardly be held responsible for their crime. This does not make their acts any less serious.

 

How the did it will puzzle people for years but why they thought they should do it should be it and how they managed to do it should be the only questions asked. This will then help us make sure it never happens again.

 

My wish: forget the witch hunt and for life to continue as it was before; the breaking of that news has sold many papers.

[Boomshakalaka]

Dirk great post btw.

[The 5th Benitel]

I was surprised the news got out into the public eye like it did but then to keep it quiet they'd have to keep James Bulger's mum in the dark as well. If they had told her they couldn't reasonably expect her to keep her mouth shit in order to maintain the best interests of her 2 year old son's killer. It's been announced on the news he's been found with child porn but, when it was said he'd been drinking in Liverpool, I cant believe people on here are saying it's no big deal. Surely the fact he was in the city is enough? Surely the very least James' family can expect is to know they live nowhere near him?

 

I could never believe they only got 8 years. A friend of mine did a psycology degree in LIverpool uni and they saw the actual case files as part of their course. It's not so much the fact the killed them, which is clearly horrific enough, it was the level of sadistic torture that poor child was subjected to. I dont buy into entirely blaming their upbringing either. I'm sure it was far from perfect but there will have been thousands of children who have grown up in much worse environments but none have committed the atrocities comparable to Venables and Thompson. How could the system presume to have cured them as soon as they got to adulthood?

[Antynwa]

I'm surprised he hasn't topped himself to be honest.

 

I mean IF he was rehabilitated, surely he would be completely destroyed by what he did as a child. He missed out on what are the key development years of any person, like some fella on TV said he had every decision made for him to be thrust into the world as he was, well I'm surprised he lasted 8 years.

 

The whole thing is fucked up, he committed a horrific murder at the age of 10 years. Fuck the whole right or wrong thing, the lad was 10 years old there has to be something quite simply wrong in this persons mind to do that heck even genetic make up.

 

I've never really believed in nature over nurture, but seriously like 99.% of ten year olds when I was his age I was playing with Action Men and my Play Station, he went out and killed someone. There is something quite simply beyond fucked up with that, and for a 10 year old to comprehend supposed normality and 'know any different' to how he was brought up is just scary.

 

People can recall people from tough backgrounds being better people, but different people act differently to different situations. The fact that he did such a act well, it really tests nurture over nature etc.

 

A question I keep asking myself is 'Did he have much of a chance from the beginning?'

[Boomshakalaka]

I was surprised the news got out into the public eye like it did but then to keep it quiet they'd have to keep James Bulger's mum in the dark as well.

 

I'm sure it was far from perfect but there will have been thousands of children who have grown up in much worse environments but none have committed the atrocities comparable to Venables and Thompson. How could the system presume to have cured them as soon as they got to adulthood?

 

Two key points. Personally I think she should not have been told. Of course the lads should be nowhere near them but still why does her pain have to be dragged back to the forefront of society's mind.

 

The presumption surely was not a presumption. Many tests would have been carried out and they would have been observed for a very long time prior to their release. It is fair to say they, most probably, were not released the very same day.

 

As for them doing it and others not this is where the investigations should begin. How could any child even consider killing another? Especially one so innocent as a lost two year old.

 

The media and decisons like this make it very hard to trust the system but in some cases it does work. Surely the system needs to constantly examine itself to make sure it works better. I hate the joke that Prison is just a University for the criminal. Prison needs to be an educational institution for the criminal: a place of self improvement and introspection.

 

Anyhow surely the answer exists somewhere in the past of criminals. Of course some crimes are perpertrated due to desperation but crime should never ever even be considered. I had a Cousin who was bullied horribly at school but the school was unwilling to do much about it. Luckily he knew better than become a twot but still he was forced right back in to his shell. Now what you have is a very shy lad that inside is a great young man.

 

My idea therefore is better support and for kids to know that there is always a better place to be than suffering in silence. This whole movement should be motivated by ensuring a crime like this never happens again.

[cochcaer]

Two key points. Personally I think she should not have been told. Of course the lads should be nowhere near them but still why does her pain have to be dragged back to the forefront of society's mind.

 

In case she holds some fascination for him or he is tempted to revisit the past. She has a right to some form of protection. Many blab on about the murderers turmoil, but I'm sure she's similarly suffered for years with 'what if' and probably darker thoughts.

 

Maybe when similar has happened to your kin you'll be Mr Rational, but I doubt it.

[King Emlyn]

I honestly think these things can be looked into far too deeply, a wrong un is a wrong un, it's the way it's always been and it's the way it will always be i'm afraid, it's nature, it's just the way it is.

[Dirk]

I honestly think these things can be looked into far too deeply, a wrong un is a wrong un, it's the way it's always been and it's the way it will always be i'm afraid, it's nature, it's just the way it is.

 

Paul, that's like saying "Even though you've got loads of evidence to prove otherwise, I'm going to say you are wrong and plump for the most simplistic explanation of the lot." This, for me, goes beyong the Bulger case, it's to do with how, as a society, we interact and how societal structures create many of the problems we face.

[Boomshakalaka]

Maybe when similar has happened to your kin you'll be Mr Rational, but I doubt it.

 

Good shout but once again surely this is the job of the system to protect and serve. Rationality though is not key here. It would take a very strong, intelligent, and forgiving human being to view this ghastly scenario objectively.

 

We could get into a very heated debate about whether the family should know about his latest misdemeanours or not but it is tantamount to me bumping in to you on a night out, liking your aftershave, and then me being allowed to ring the Crown Prosecution Service whenever I want to find out exactly where you are and what you have been doing. I know this is not the case but hopefully you get my point.

 

Seriously I do not care about the lad but I do care about what is going on in our society right now and Bulger's parents.

 

Anyway I have just discovered that apparently the lad has a collection of child porn contrary to my earlier belief. This is not good and neither is murder.

 

Some are saying this is a sign that he was never cured in the first place. This therefore is my reaction to what those with a voice that clearly see justice as being the death or permanent incarceration of this lad and his accomplice. This will take some proving but I think my own theory should be given some credence when people start looking for an explanation.

 

As a lad he lashed out in a most disturbing manner. This will be as a result of a manifestation of problems. This is not meant to excuse the lad his actions yet it is possible a fact. Were they abused as children (or did one follow the abused)? I believe we would discover this is a fact.

 

The point he was (possibly) cured but on his release life has not gone as he imagined it would. Over time his mind has slipped and he has slowly been regressing back towards a very nasty mindset that led to him harming a child. Clearly his life has not been so bad since release and therefore he has not slipped as far. Yet he is going towards the same behaviour and thoughts. The child porn? Probably due to the fact he now has a sexual appetite. It is understood that many child abusers were abused them self.

 

This is where the system has let us all down especially James Bulger's parents. As his behaviour started to detoriate they should have been right on top of him. There has been a variety of incidences, allegedly, and these should have been dealt with appropriately.

 

Honestly my feeling is that right was done but the good work was not continued. Policy should be held accountable and not people as they have spending budgets which spoil a large part of the running of our country, businesses, households and social lives.

 

We can all see why the media were allowed to get hold of this as it is most certainly newsworthy as it splits (unifies) our nation and captures everybody's attention. The person that sold the story to the media or decided to announce this news is the one that should be sacked.

 

Last but not least thank heavens the lad has been caught in his tracks. Time for punishment and rehabilitation. Seriously I think society will be a lot safer if he never comes out unless upon his release he is monitored far closer.

 

Of course he should not be released unless he does not require watching.

[Boomshakalaka]

Paul, that's like saying "Even though you've got loads of evidence to prove otherwise, I'm going to say you are wrong and plump for the most simplistic explanation of the lot." This, for me, goes beyong the Bulger case, it's to do with how, as a society, we interact and how societal structures create many of the problems we face.

 

My friend that is nature. We have the tools to deal with these and they are called genes. Genes and interaction have a direct influence on one another.

 

Of course I do not ascribe to your pal's belief that a wrong un is always going to be a wrong un. If that person can be programmed to react differently the person will change but if people generally the programmed do not keep on top of this programming or continue to apply it's teaching they will regress.

 

My lay understanding but food for thought.

[Dirk]

My friend that is nature. We have the tools to deal with these and they are called genes. Genes and interaction have a direct influence on one another.

 

Of course I do not ascribe to your pal's belief that a wrong un is always going to be a wrong un. If that person can be programmed to react differently the person will change but if people generally the programmed do not keep on top of this programming or continue to apply it's teaching they will regress.

 

My lay understanding but food for thought.

 

The key isn't reprogramming. It's prevention. The problem is that both psychology and psychiatry are, generally speaking, conservative disciplines - they view disorder from a naturalist perspective. I agree with this quote by Dennis Fox and Isaac Prilleltensky "Because psychology's values, assumptions and norms have supported society's dominant institutions since its birth as a field of study, the field's mainstream contributes to social injustice and thwarts the promotion of human welfare...”

 

Here is something I've recently written.

 

Reducing human experience to abstract concepts strips human life of its meaning and falsely renders events rich in meaning analogous to discrete units comparable to atoms, it also avoids dealing with some of wider societal causes of mental ill health. It is a perspective which is rooted in the biomedical paradigm of health in the Western World. Cox and Kelly (2002) noted the modernist similarities between psychology and psychiatry; both disciplines, they argue, propose that mental suffering can be understood outside of one's sociopolitical boundaries i.e. they occur within and are caused by processes within individuals. This position becomes clear when one sees that psychiatry considers mental distress as reflecting biological abnormalities, with psychopharmaceuticals being the principle treatment of choice (Schatzberg & Nemeroff, 2009); more often than not, little or scant attention is given to the social causes of mental distress. Psychology perceives disorders as reflecting disordered thinking or abnormalities in cognitive processes (Field, 2003). Both are united in their view that distress occurs in a simplistic, linear fashion and both psychology and psychiatry consider the symptoms of suffering as dependent variables that can be attenuated via the manipulation of an independent variable (medication, ECT, dose, course, psychotherapy, number of sessions, context). Neither appear to seriously and consistently champion the effects of social forces beyond the immediacy of the self and the nuclear family.

 

Again, I'd like to reiterate that I am not saying that mental illness has anything to do with this case or not, the point I am making is that we do not develop in isolation from our environments; humans are both shaped by and shapers of their environments.

[King Emlyn]

Paul, that's like saying "Even though you've got loads of evidence to prove otherwise, I'm going to say you are wrong and plump for the most simplistic explanation of the lot." This, for me, goes beyong the Bulger case, it's to do with how, as a society, we interact and how societal structures create many of the problems we face.

Don't get me wrong, i like a laugh and a joke about "the lentil munchers" and all that but i'm not stupid, of course there are mentally ill people who can't truly be held accountable for violent crimes i totally accept that. Likewise i can understand that certain nasty personalities are moulded by experiences and are just as much a victim as a result; but i'm completely serious about the "wrong un" angle, there are many, many people who are simply by nature a nasty piece of work, i truly believe that, no question. I've seen it way too many times.

[Dirk]

Don't get me wrong, i like a laugh and a joke about "the lentil munchers" and all that but i'm not stupid, of course there are mentally ill people who can't truly be held accountable for violent crimes i totally accept that. Likewise i can understand that certain nasty personalities are moulded by experiences and are just as much a victim as a result; but i'm completely serious about the "wrong un" angle, there are many, many people who are simply by nature a nasty piece of work, i truly believe that, no question. I've seen it way too many times.

 

I am not saying that people do such heinous things because they are mentally ill. The examples I give are merely demonstrations of the effects of environmental factors on psychological development. I do believe there are people that do some incredibly bad things and that there are individuals who need to remain imprisoned or permanently held in psychiatric prisons (sic). However, I don't think they were born that way. It's far too deterministic. The way of looking at this is akin to the difference between newtonian mechanics and non-linear dymanics.

[King Emlyn]

I am not saying that people do such heinous things because they are mentally ill. The examples I give are merely demonstrations of the effects of environmental factors on psychological development. I do believe there are people that do some incredibly bad things and that there are individuals who need to remain imprisoned or permanently held in psychiatric prisons (sic). However, I don't think they were born that way. It's far too deterministic. The way of looking at this is akin to the difference between newtonian mechanics and non-linear dymanics.

That's easy for you to say! Ha, obviously i'm not taking you on in a debate about the human psyche because i'm going to get slaughtered, but i do stand by my opinion.

[The 5th Benitel]

I still dont buy that Venables and Thompson had a significantly worse childhood than hunderds, probably thousands, of kids in this city in the last 20-30 years. Bear in mind, they didn't just kill James Bulger they sadistically tortured him for a prolonged period. Doing things that wouldn't even occur to anyone of any age, let alone two young boys.

 

I just dont see how anyone could be confident that they'd been fully rehabilitated more or less as soon as they hit adulthood. I read that release in those circumstances are made purely on public safety rather than the interests of the prisoner. How could they be sure that someone capable of the things they did would pose no threat after only 8 years?

[Boomshakalaka]

Don't get me wrong, i like a laugh and a joke about "the lentil munchers" and all that but i'm not stupid, of course there are mentally ill people who can't truly be held accountable for violent crimes i totally accept that. Likewise i can understand that certain nasty personalities are moulded by experiences and are just as much a victim as a result; but i'm completely serious about the "wrong un" angle, there are many, many people who are simply by nature a nasty piece of work, i truly believe that, no question. I've seen it way too many times.

 

A very serious question: have you ever met a bad baby? With the right treatment and discipline any baby will develop in to a rounded individual. Now throw in a curve ball like abuse and you will be staggered by what happens next.

[Total Longo]

Reducing human experience to abstract concepts strips human life of its meaning and falsely renders events rich in meaning analogous to discrete units comparable to atoms, it also avoids dealing with some of wider societal causes of mental ill health. It is a perspective which is rooted in the biomedical paradigm of health in the Western World. Cox and Kelly (2002) noted the modernist similarities between psychology and psychiatry; both disciplines, they argue, propose that mental suffering can be understood outside of one's sociopolitical boundaries i.e. they occur within and are caused by processes within individuals. This position becomes clear when one sees that psychiatry considers mental distress as reflecting biological abnormalities, with psychopharmaceuticals being the principle treatment of choice (Schatzberg & Nemeroff, 2009); more often than not, little or scant attention is given to the social causes of mental distress. Psychology perceives disorders as reflecting disordered thinking or abnormalities in cognitive processes (Field, 2003). Both are united in their view that distress occurs in a simplistic, linear fashion and both psychology and psychiatry consider the symptoms of suffering as dependent variables that can be attenuated via the manipulation of an independent variable (medication, ECT, dose, course, psychotherapy, number of sessions, context). Neither appear to seriously and consistently champion the effects of social forces beyond the immediacy of the self and the nuclear family..

 

Come again?

[Anny Road]

James Bulger suffered multiple fractures: Pathologist reveals two-year-old had 42 injuries including fractured skull. Jonathan Foster reports - UK, News - The Independent

 

Read that and tell me that this lad should be allowed out on the piss in Liverpool.

[Dougie Do'ins]

Lets be honest. Is anyone who has contributed to this thread even remotely surprised that one of the two convicted is making headlines again ?

 

The only thing that's surprised me is, it's taken so long.

[King Emlyn]

A very serious question: have you ever met a bad baby? With the right treatment and discipline any baby will develop in to a rounded individual. Now throw in a curve ball like abuse and you will be staggered by what happens next.

I'm 45 years of age, nothing staggers me; let me turn the question around to my point of view. Do you think Hitler was a monster in his cot, do you think Einstein was a genius in his? I think they probably were.