rehabilitation.... longfox this is 4 u!

[longrunsthefox]

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

Cop out again. You're obsessed with me agreeing that the authorities should have tried to rehabiliate these boys. Get over it. That's what I think. Seems in Venables case it ain't working. So you have changed your mind about hanging them when they were ten... good man... it wasn't a great idea was it     

[ziggysego]

To all that are guessing what Venerable might have done or claiming to know what he did because they read it in X newspaper or saw it on News Channel Y, this following clip might be interesting to watch. Go to 6.15 onwards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cT0TSp9Mm0

[gallsman]

Regardless of the baying mobs people don't have a right to know what he did, and that includes Bulgers mother.

Well then they need to stop releasing details on EVERYONE charged.

For the last fecking time he hasn't been charged yet!

[thebigfella]

Regardless of the baying mobs people don't have a right to know what he did, and that includes Bulgers mother.

Well then they need to stop releasing details on EVERYONE charged.

For the last fecking time he hasn't been charged yet!

If he does get charged they can release his details like everyone and sure no one will be any wiser. What POG and others want is his anonymity to be removed and his new identity revealed, which is completely different.

Not defending him by any means but I can understand why the courts/home secretary etc.... should not release his new identity. Everyone and I mean everyone is entitled to a fair trail without prejudice or otherwise the legal system is a sham (I sure we all know of a few high profile miscarrages of justice  ). The f**king crusading red tops and baying mob could prejudice this whole case and he'll never get a fair trial (at the very least argue he never did). Some may say so fcuk but when he drags it though the legal system with huge cost to the tax payers and a large sum of compententsation at the end (and I have no doubt he will win); then answer me this, has it been worth it just to satisfy a few headcases and sell a few shitty newspapers like the sun?

Who will be the papers and mob be yapping at then? The same people they are yapping at for not revealing his new identity thats who.

[pintsofguinness]

Regardless of the baying mobs people don't have a right to know what he did, and that includes Bulgers mother.

Well then they need to stop releasing details on EVERYONE charged.

For the last fecking time he hasn't been charged yet!

I know that, why do you keep saying it?

[gallsman]

Because you keep implying that details are routinely released on people who haven't been charged with a crime....

[longrunsthefox]

More food for thought.... let's keep to the subject and not personal attacks...   


Venables should 'have a chance' says his ex-solicitor

Jon Venables' former solicitor Laurence Lee: ''It's very hard to brand a child as evil''
Jon Venables' former solicitor urged the justice system not to "give up" on the child killer - recalled to prison over "serious allegations".
Laurence Lee told the BBC it was "very hard to class a child as evil" and he still had the right to a chance of rehabilitation.
Venables, 27, who murdered James Bulger in 1993, is under risk of attack as the "media hype" continues, Mr Lee said.
The justice secretary has refused to divulge why Venables has been recalled.
Jack Straw told the House of Commons it was in the interests of justice and that disclosure of the allegations could prejudice any further action taken against him.
Mr Lee, who represented a 10-year-old Venables throughout his trial said he agreed with Straw's decision adding that Venables had the right to be tried in a "normal democratic manner".
'Venables is at a greater risk, the more the hype and the speculation continue, the more chance his cover is going to be blown.
"He's in prison but at the moment it's a security tinder box, a real hot potato has been created here and I can only hope that things start to die down.
"If there is a trial and he is convicted, he will be punished and his chances of release will be greatly reduced."

Baroness Butler-Sloss, who originally made the decision to grant anonymity to James Bulger's two killers on their 2001 release, has warned that Venables would be at risk from vigilantes if his new identity is revealed.

Mr Lee said he was "flabbergasted" that Venables had breached the terms of his licence, but he said someone even with "nerves of steel" would find it extremely difficult to start a new life with a new identity.

Jon Venables was given a new identity on his release from prison
"The pressures on him to live this lie and constantly have to lie to make friends and fit in with society, I think are what made him breach his licence."

Denise Fergus, James' mother, told ITV's This Morning she found it hard to even say Venables' name and that she had the right to know what he is currently accused of.
She said it would not "take the pain away" but would reassure her.
"I am sick of them closing doors in my face. It's about time they started telling me what I think I should know.
"As James's mother I have a right to know."

[tyrone girl]

I personally dont feel anyone has the right to know what he has done this time that includes Denise Fergus 

[thebigfella]

I personally dont feel anyone has the right to know what he has done this time that includes Denise Fergus 

Agreed, it could make it very easy for people to work out his new identity or even worse jurors on other similar cases making a dangerous assumption and prejudiced decisions regarding a case.

[Franko]

More food for thought.... let's keep to the subject and not personal attacks...   


Venables should 'have a chance' says his ex-solicitor

Jon Venables' former solicitor Laurence Lee: ''It's very hard to brand a child as evil''
Jon Venables' former solicitor urged the justice system not to "give up" on the child killer - recalled to prison over "serious allegations".
Laurence Lee told the BBC it was "very hard to class a child as evil" and he still had the right to a chance of rehabilitation.
Venables, 27, who murdered James Bulger in 1993, is under risk of attack as the "media hype" continues, Mr Lee said.
The justice secretary has refused to divulge why Venables has been recalled.
Jack Straw told the House of Commons it was in the interests of justice and that disclosure of the allegations could prejudice any further action taken against him.
Mr Lee, who represented a 10-year-old Venables throughout his trial said he agreed with Straw's decision adding that Venables had the right to be tried in a "normal democratic manner".
'Venables is at a greater risk, the more the hype and the speculation continue, the more chance his cover is going to be blown.
"He's in prison but at the moment it's a security tinder box, a real hot potato has been created here and I can only hope that things start to die down.
"If there is a trial and he is convicted, he will be punished and his chances of release will be greatly reduced."

Baroness Butler-Sloss, who originally made the decision to grant anonymity to James Bulger's two killers on their 2001 release, has warned that Venables would be at risk from vigilantes if his new identity is revealed.

Mr Lee said he was "flabbergasted" that Venables had breached the terms of his licence, but he said someone even with "nerves of steel" would find it extremely difficult to start a new life with a new identity.

Jon Venables was given a new identity on his release from prison
"The pressures on him to live this lie and constantly have to lie to make friends and fit in with society, I think are what made him breach his licence."

Denise Fergus, James' mother, told ITV's This Morning she found it hard to even say Venables' name and that she had the right to know what he is currently accused of.
She said it would not "take the pain away" but would reassure her.
"I am sick of them closing doors in my face. It's about time they started telling me what I think I should know.
"As James's mother I have a right to know."

I'd agree - why exactly does she have a right to know?

[pintsofguinness]

Because you keep implying that details are routinely released on people who haven't been charged with a crime....

No I don't

[gallsman]

I give up pints, it's like talking to a wall. You have refused to provide an answer time and time again on why the detail should be released even though he hasn't yet been charged. If you're on the wind-up, congratulations, you've had me for a day or so.

I'd agree - why exactly does she have a right to know?

She doesn't. As harsh as it may seem, there should be no attempt made to risk the credibility of the justice system in order to accommodate Denise Fergus, despite the torment she has clearly gone and continues to go through. She has my sympathies, but I don't agree she has the right to know. Unfortunately, the tabloids have never much cared for stability and credibility of the overall system and often focus on the individual aspects.

[pintsofguinness]

I give up pints, it's like talking to a wall. You have refused to provide an answer time and time again on why the detail should be released even though he hasn't yet been charged.

I think his details should be released after he's charged - I've given my reasons for that.

[longrunsthefox]

I think what he has done should be made public if he is convicted and is going back to jail for the long haul, but not if it is a minor offence. The tabloids have thrown out about four different offences here and know they can't defame him no matter what they say.

[gallsman]

I cant believe they're still protecting him by not saying what he done and where.
Hopefully that will be him locked up for life anyway.

Posted when this story broke. No mention of the fact that he hadn't yet been charged. When you don't clarify things, people tend to get frustrated...