[Archived] Jon Venables

[T4E]

I couldn't live in a society where an innocent is potentially murdered.

You already do. Difference is, the victim isn't decided on by a court of law after a lengthy and hopefully thorough trial, they're chosen on a whim by scrotes like Jon Venables.

[thenodrog]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/03/07/jon-venables-sent-back-to-prison-over-child-porn-offence-115875-22090622/

The bloke is a complete write off.

And here's another...... "Mr Straw said yesterday: “I said on Wednesday that I was unable to give further details of the reasons for Jon Venables’ return to custody, because it was not in the public interest to do so."

Really Jack? Well mention James Bulger and most people over 30 will recall the case instantly. How public do you want it to be?

Covering up in fact censoring these details only benefits Venables and I suspect more importantly the laughably titled Secretary of State for Justice.

[BuckyRover]

He already served his time for murder.

This is unfortunate but if he has committed another crime then he has to be returned to jail.

I don't understand why people get so angry about this though. It was established in 1999 that they had been tried illegally (to quell the frenzied public I assume).

It was a heinous crime but I have actually heard people suggesting that we would have been better off hanging them both. I think if somebody is suggesting that the state should be hanging 10 year old boys, then they need to take a long hard look at themselves.

[broadsword]

8 years for murder under any circumstances is a shockingly low tarriff. What were the degrading circumstances under which they were tried, and why should that mitigate (by half) the length of the sentence they were due to serve? How they were treated in court has nothing to do with the magnitude of the crime they have committed,

People are angry because they shouldn't have been let out so soon, and the fact that one of them has allegedly committed child porn offences whilst at liberty I don't think really surprises anyone.

In the eyes of the law he's done his time for murder, but I think a lot of people take issue with that.

Really Jack? Well mention James Bulger and most people over 30 will recall the case instantly. How public do you want it to be?

Covering up in fact censoring these details only benefits Venables and I suspect more importantly the laughably titled Secretary of State for Justice.

He didn't want to disclose the details for fear of prejudicing the case against venables because of teh ensuing publicity. I wouldn't doubt that he'd want Venables to be punished properly if he were guilty, that's what has moitivated his remarks I suspect.

[ABBEY]

He already served his time for murder.

This is unfortunate but if he has committed another crime then he has to be returned to jail.

I don't understand why people get so angry about this though. It was established in 1999 that they had been tried illegally (to quell the frenzied public I assume).

It was a heinous crime but I have actually heard people suggesting that we would have been better off hanging them both. I think if somebody is suggesting that the state should be hanging 10 year old boys, then they need to take a long hard look at themselves.

You really are a prick at times....why are people angry? Why the frig do you think? What them two evil scum did deserves them to be hanged and I don't give a ###### what age they were.devils they are and satan driven.anyone who sticks up for them are a disgrace to the good of the human race

[T4E]

I'm told he was locked up for not agreeing with his Dad about the Christmas Tree formation.

Probably a couple of days too soon, but still excellent

[Rovermatt]

I find this subject too distressing and hate that they have been brought into the media spotlight again. What really blew my fuse though was when I heard one of them had been allowed to have a child. There are a lot of vigilantes out there who would love to tear these two to pieces, hang them etc. I think a far more sensible and just punishment would have been to chemically or surgically sterilise them before they were released. They took a little boy from his Mother and Father, for them to never have the right or ability to have a child would be a just punishment. Alas no, our lefty, hippy, do-gooding, wet nanny state prefers to allow them to breed, at the tax payers expense.

It ain't like it were in the old days. Chemical and surgical sterilisation was the done thing under Maggie...

Used to be all fields round here.

He already served his time for murder.

I'm not one of the crowd wishing to see us return to the Middle Ages but I honestly believe these little @#/?s should never have been released. Served their time?! They're not even out of their 20s yet.

[colin]

I must say the tone of your post makes you appear like a bit of a Chav

Bugger, got that wrong then....................

[adopted scouser]

Hopefully with him inside the p1ss will be in his porridge, hands on the gas hob.

Scum.

[Exiled_Rover]

Both should have been locked away for life.

[colin]

There seems to be a lot of anger on here for a couple of f***ed up 10 year-olds. From 17 years ago.

That's an observation.

[broadsword]

And now one of them is a f**ked-up 27 year old who (allegedly) starts fights in the workplace, takes drugs and is a consumer of child pornography.

I think people would be right to be angry that he was ever at liberty to indulge himself in further criminal behaviour behind a veil of anonymity which was taxpayer-funded, when he'd tortured and killed a 2 year old only 8 years before.

So I'm not ata all surprised to see angry sentiments expressed. I'm sure that there's a lot of people that would like to dish out some rough justice for him. Personally, I'm not into retribution, I'd just like to lock him up and throw away the key.

Chances of rehabilitation - nil. Right to freedom (taxpayer-funded) - nil. Value to society - nil.

[yoda]

Bugger, got that wrong then....................

It is what happens when you start gobbing off on the keyboard after a night out with the lads!

appology accepted

[ABBEY]

There seems to be a lot of anger on here for a couple of f***ed up 10 year-olds. From 17 years ago.

E

That's an observation.

So you would have these two t@@@s round for tea because it was 17 years ago. Have a f party whilst your at it...can see it now.......Hitler .idi amin.fred west.peter sutcliffe.shipman .bin laden

[Billy Castell]

Sounds a great party Abbey. Is Pol Pot invited? He usually brings great wine.

Nothing should be reported that might scupper this trial on grounds of prejugdice. So the papers had better shut the ____ up, or else justice will not be done. As for the other matter, I would not have released him for many years, if at all. The change of name is another issue I am against. I am against knuckle dragging vigilantes going around beating up paediatritians because they think they abuse kids, but Venebles killed a 2 year old boy, so........tough luck matey.

[thenodrog]

Sounds a great party Abbey. Is Pol Pot invited? He usually brings great wine.

Nothing should be reported that might scupper this trial on grounds of prejugdice. So the papers had better shut the ____ up, or else justice will not be done. As for the other matter, I would not have released him for many years, if at all. The change of name is another issue I am against. I am against knuckle dragging vigilantes going around beating up paediatritians because they think they abuse kids, but Venebles killed a 2 year old boy, so........tough luck matey.

You obviously mean paedophiles Billy.

Definition

paediatrician noun

A doctor who has special training in medical care for children

[adopted scouser]

You obviously mean paedophiles Billy.

Definition

paediatrician noun

A doctor who has special training in medical care for children

Time for an edit Gord, a massive whhoooooossshhhh just went over your head

[T4E]

You obviously mean paedophiles Billy.

Definition

paediatrician noun

A doctor who has special training in medical care for children

Ouch

[MeanGreenMachine]

I don’t care if they were 10 or 30, id would of quite happily put the noose around their necks and kicked they stools over what they were standing on. They knew exactly what they were doing (much like those 2 evil little @#/?s who did the same thing recently despite failing to kill those 2 boys).

Though I feel death would never be a sufficient punishment for them.

[Sparky Marky]

You obviously mean paedophiles Billy.

Definition

paediatrician noun

A doctor who has special training in medical care for children

missed the thread.

[jim mk2]

You obviously mean paedophiles Billy.

Definition

paediatrician noun

A doctor who has special training in medical care for children

Text messages and emails flying around Merseyside revealing the alleged location of Venables, according to reports.

In their search for "justice", some people will be satisfied only when he has been killed.

[ABBEY]

why is it funny?

[Claytons Left Boot]

Wow... I didn't know we had accredited Child Psychologists on this board.

You don't need to be an accredited child psychologist to know that the two evil, little @#/?s knew right from wrong.

Even in Great Britain, where every Tom, Dick or Harry seems to want to queue up to help the perpetrators of crime rather than those who have been victimised.

[thenodrog]

Time for an edit Gord, a massive whhoooooossshhhh just went over your head

Drat drat and double drat! And here's me trying to be helpful.

[cletus]

I can totally understand the anger aimed at the two animals that killed Jamie Bulger (i`d love to see them both get their come-uppance) but in the eyes of the law (& we are a country with laws) they`ve served their 'time' for that particular crime. I think they should`ve served a LOT longer in prison......but the powers-that-be running the country have seen fit for these two to be let out 'on license'.

One of these scrotes has apparently re-offended or broken his terms of release. He has been taken back into custody, probably awaiting a new trial. The new trial will deal with his 'alleged' new misdemeanors. Although it sticks in the throat, everybody is entitled to a fair trial. It`s up to the courts to decide whether he`s guilty or not of the new crimes......not the press. That`s why the government cannot release details.

Any allegations printed in the press might contaminate the jury`s decisions. A judge will not let that happen. Venables lawers will pounce on this & use it to its full extent in court. Venables could well walk free before the trial has even begun......& nobody wants that.

Jamie Bulger`s mother is rightly upset at what`s been going on over the last week or so, but what would she rather see....Venables getting banged up again LEGALLY or him walking free due to a technicallity caused by the press?

The public`s thirst for knowledge might well scupper the justice system.

Everybody should take a step back, let things happen in the proper way & evenually the entire story will come out at the court case.......THEN the country can decide if things were done properly.

It`s easy to criticise the government over this, but if they balls it all up by releasing info that might ruin the trial.....the #### will hit the fan in a massive way!