rehabilitation.... longfox this is 4 u!

[gallsman]

He's not 10 now Zig.

So it's ok to do him physical damage?

Where did I advocate that? I think he should be locked up for life.

So do I.

How does your knowledge or lack thereof with respect to whatever he's done to be recalled affect that? Why is it so important that you know what he did rather than being happy knowing he's locked up?

[gallsman]

Do the public in general have a right to know the details of his return to prison? Not in the slightest. Are you in danger from Jon Veneables? No. Does he pose a threat to your child? Very unlikely. Will Self on Question Time last week asked how the general public are in any way worse off by not knowing the details of his return. Can anyone here provide a (mature and coherent) response? This guy spends his life looking over his shoulder and will do until the day he dies, which due to the self-appointed vigilante nature of the red top media will probably be some day in the not too distant future.

If anyone else is charged with a crime their name, address and details of the charge are made public. Their court date is public, in most cases their trial is public. The only time details are kept private are in cases when the victim needs their privacy protected, oh and if you've previously beat a toddler to death. 

What makes me angry is the constant protection they have received  - Why don't you tell us why Venables deserves the protection neither me or you would get.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't read anywhere yet about him being charged with anything.

*Waits for someone to mention about how I "stood up for" Iris Robinson*

Ok so you think the details should be made public when he's charged?

If it's something that actually newsworthy that suggests that he remains a threat to society, such as the child porn allegations, then yes.

If he forgot to pay a parking fine or got into a row at work, then no.

[pintsofguinness]

He's not 10 now Zig.

So it's ok to do him physical damage?

Where did I advocate that? I think he should be locked up for life.

So do I.

How does your knowledge or lack thereof with respect to whatever he's done to be recalled affect that? Why is it so important that you know what he did rather than being happy knowing he's locked up?

I've stated my reasons in my previous post.  I'm still waiting on you to answer it.

[ardmhachaabu]

fox what is wrong with you?

Here are my contributions to this thread so far, in order, just for you because it seems you are slow

sorry but imo you just cant rehabilitate evil cnuts like venables & thompson. they should have been hung from the nearest tree for what they did to that poor toddler.

Exactly.  I read the article pints linked to, the pair of them knew exactly what they were doing every step of the way.  They deliberately deceived adults who were questioning them about Jamie as Jamie was obviously crying at times and was very distressed at times as well.  Hanging would have been too good for them

Have you read the details of what they did and how they acted?

Hang 8 year old kids? Are you mental?

Put it like this then, they should never have been released

Stop harping on about the first thing I said and concentrate.  I am entitled to change my mind, that's what discussion often brings about in adults

[ardmhachaabu]

gallsman, the fact he has been recalled means it is something serious

[gallsman]

gallsman, the fact he has been recalled means it is something serious

Ah, so we'll just resort to presumption instead of facts and evidence?

[gallsman]

He's not 10 now Zig.

So it's ok to do him physical damage?

Where did I advocate that? I think he should be locked up for life.

So do I.

How does your knowledge or lack thereof with respect to whatever he's done to be recalled affect that? Why is it so important that you know what he did rather than being happy knowing he's locked up?

I've stated my reasons in my previous post.  I'm still waiting on you to answer it.

Answer what?

[pintsofguinness]

If anyone else is charged with a crime their name, address and details of the charge are made public. Their court date is public, in most cases their trial is public. The only time details are kept private are in cases when the victim needs their privacy protected, oh and if you've previously beat a toddler to death.

What makes me angry is the constant protection they have received  - Why don't you tell us why Venables deserves the protection neither me or you would get.

[longrunsthefox]

fox what is wrong with you?

Here are my contributions to this thread so far, in order, just for you because it seems you are slow

sorry but imo you just cant rehabilitate evil cnuts like venables & thompson. they should have been hung from the nearest tree for what they did to that poor toddler.

Exactly.  I read the article pints linked to, the pair of them knew exactly what they were doing every step of the way.  They deliberately deceived adults who were questioning them about Jamie as Jamie was obviously crying at times and was very distressed at times as well.  Hanging would have been too good for them

Have you read the details of what they did and how they acted?

Hang 8 year old kids? Are you mental?

Put it like this then, they should never have been released

Stop harping on about the first thing I said and concentrate.  I am entitled to change my mind, that's what discussion often brings about in adults

If you keep harping back to what I said...  well ditto... hang them says you...  (at 10-years-old)   

[ardmhachaabu]

Rehabilitate them says fox 

[longrunsthefox]

Rehabilitate them says fox 

hang two ten years olds says Armaghabu  ... 

[ardmhachaabu]

I give up even trying to debate with you fox, once you get something in your head you are impossible.  I have given my opinion very clearly on this thread twice, I won't repeat it just because you are thick

[Caitlin]

It's not about the protection of Venables- it's about the protection of the public.No-one is going to hang children so when the courts made a decision to release him at 18 and it was clearly better to have checks and balances in place than not.He's obviously a risk again so they are right to bring him back in so no-one else is put at risk. I don't think the Fox said he is rehabilitated-clearly he's not.However, surely it's better to have these systems in place than not ?

[gallsman]

Why don't you tell us why Venables deserves the protection neither me or you would get.[/i]

If you'd murdered a two year old when you were ten I'm fairly sure they'd protect you too.

He hasn't been charged with any crime yet, so what right to you have to know about what he's alleged to have done?

[pintsofguinness]

Why don't you tell us why Venables deserves the protection neither me or you would get.[/i]

If you'd murdered a two year old when you were ten I'm fairly sure they'd protect you too.

He hasn't been charged with any crime yet, so what right to you have to know about what he's alleged to have done?

I'm not talking about his protection when he's ten, I'm talking about his protection now and when he is charged.
What right has he to be protected at the age of 27 if he's charged with a crime? No one else would get the same protection. 
Despite several attempts to try and get you to answer this you havent been able to, that's says it all.