Author Topic: So? Seems fair enough  (Read 398 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GROWLER

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17808
  • Reputation: 0
So? Seems fair enough
« on: March 09, 2010, 01:20:07 PM »
James Bulger killer Jon Venables could be murdered by vengeful vigilantes if his new identity is revealed, the judge who granted his anonymity has warned.
Both Baroness Butler-Sloss and Justice Secretary Jack Straw defended the need for secrecy amid growing public pressure and a direct appeal from the toddler's mother for more details about why Venables, 27, was sent back to jail.
Just hours earlier Denise Fergus accused the Government of treating the issue like a political football and of closing doors in her face.
Lady Butler-Sloss, the former president of the High Court's family division who granted Venables anonymity on his release from prison, stressed "the enormous importance of protecting his anonymity now and if he is released because those who wanted to kill him in 2001 are likely to be out there now".


I'd mercilessly kill the bastard if I ever came across him too.
That evil scummy parasitic twat ...and his equally verminous cretin chummy, should have been hung for what they did.
Still makes me shudder to this day reading and seeing all this stuff again.

Offline Miss Demeanour

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 36015
  • Reputation: 2
Re: So? Seems fair enough
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2010, 01:23:07 PM »
Incredulous innit  noooo:

Compromise - protect his identity in public but not in prison.

Lets see how far that gets him  whistle:
Skubber

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 153403
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: So? Seems fair enough
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2010, 01:27:31 PM »
They should certainly never have been let out at 18 IMHO.

And who has lost their job for that decision I wonder...?  rubschin:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline GROWLER

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17808
  • Reputation: 0
Re: So? Seems fair enough
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2010, 01:31:51 PM »
How much is all his anomonity costing us, the tax payer then ey?
I could burn out all the bladders in the world just thinking about the fact that this filth is still actually breathing.

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: So? Seems fair enough
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2010, 02:43:03 PM »
James Bulger's mother has had her day. That the court decided on "life" sentences and then provided that the murderers could be let out on licence was much debated at the time and Mrs Bulger (as was) had her say then. That one of the murderers is alleged to have broken the terms of his licence is a different matter all together and nothing to do with her. What he has or has not done by way of offending is not her concern. If she wants to remake the point that they should never have been paroled then I would support that argument but details any new offences he is supposed to have committed do not need to be revealed prior to his eventual appearance before the courts.

I believe that both boys should have been locked up for a lot longer than they were. Capital punishment would not have been appropriate at the age of 10 or 11.
30 years without any parole would have been about right I feel. After all the train robbers got that and all they did was steal a few quid that was going to be destroyed anyway. And please don't start on about the fact that one of them coshed the bloody train driver. It has always been my opinion that they were sentenced to 30 because they made the authorities look stupid.

Question ~ How much of Mrs Bulger's torment and anguish is down to what happened and wouldn't have if she had kept a proper watch over her child at the time?
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Offline Darwins Selection

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 39138
  • Reputation: 6
  • I mostly despair
Re: So? Seems fair enough
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2010, 05:20:54 PM »
James Bulger's mother has had her day. That the court decided on "life" sentences and then provided that the murderers could be let out on licence was much debated at the time and Mrs Bulger (as was) had her say then. That one of the murderers is alleged to have broken the terms of his licence is a different matter all together and nothing to do with her. What he has or has not done by way of offending is not her concern. If she wants to remake the point that they should never have been paroled then I would support that argument but details any new offences he is supposed to have committed do not need to be revealed prior to his eventual appearance before the courts.

I believe that both boys should have been locked up for a lot longer than they were. Capital punishment would not have been appropriate at the age of 10 or 11.
30 years without any parole would have been about right I feel. After all the train robbers got that and all they did was steal a few quid that was going to be destroyed anyway. And please don't start on about the fact that one of them coshed the bloody train driver. It has always been my opinion that they were sentenced to 30 because they made the authorities look stupid.

Question ~ How much of Mrs Bulger's torment and anguish is down to what happened and wouldn't have if she had kept a proper watch over her child at the time?

 happ096

Well reasoned and totally correct as ever old dog.


However, on purely economic grounds, stringing them up from the nearest tree wins hands down.

Still, that would make the government popular and we don't want that right now do we?
I mostly despair