Do we need to know who they are ?

Spelunker

Spelunker

Well-Known Forumite
Suspended sentences for social media Venables posters

Social media users Dean Liddle and Neil Harkins have each received nine month jail sentences suspended for 15 months at London's High Court for breaching an injunction banning the revelation of the new identities of toddler James Bulger's killers.

Don't we have a right to know the dangers that live amongst us?
 
Withnail

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
Spelunker said:
Don't we have a right to know the dangers that live amongst us?
Click to expand...
I think the problem in this instance is the reasonable concern for extra-judicial 'justice' being meted out on people who have 'done their time' as it were.

I have a tendency to believe that once the punishment of a custodial sentence has been served, it is incumbent on us all to accept that the freed internee has a clean sheet - albeit one on which faint stains remain. If we don't believe this to be the case, i fail to see what purpose there is for depriving a person of their liberty at all - if there is no possibility of redemption we may as well exterminate all the brutes.

I know this is all a bit on the 'bleeding heart liberal' side, and it is quite probable i would feel differently if James were my son, brother, cousin, grandson etc, but i would like to think that i could keep my head whether all around were losing theirs or no. Crimes are committed, sentences are passed, punishments are passed down, punishments are served, criminals are freed. Without a personal attachment to the process, the process itself seems reasonable. Ask yourself this - if not this system, then what other?

The Bulger case might be seen to be exceptional, but in some ways it isn't really. You might think that they should never have been released, but evidently there were others who thought otherwise. The offenders were little more than children themselves at the time of the offence and their release was subject to an injunction for their protection which, if you think about it with a cool head, was probably necessary.

If the injunction was breached it needed to be dealt with with some severity. Like it or not this is the way we do things here - one wonders what alternative people propose?

On a related note, you might want to watch this -


- which i never finished watching due to the 'curious incident of the tw@ in the night' - said tw@ meant i missed the scene where i may, or may not, have lost my sympathy with a latter day Spidey.

(i'm rambling again aren't i?)
 
Gramaisc

Gramaisc

Forum O. G.
Withnail said:
I think the problem in this instance is the reasonable concern for extra-judicial 'justice' being meted out on people who have 'done their time' as it were.
Click to expand...
There is also the possibility that the pictures may not actually be of the individuals concerned, or there may be innocent parties who bear a strong resemblance to them, etc...

I'm sure that we all remember the rather inaccurate targeting here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society
 
peggy

peggy

Well-Known Forumite
as a mother of young children then yes I would want to know if there was a "risky adult" in my community. I am interested in how succesful "Sarahs law" is and if this will continue to be rolled out . However, as someone who has worked directly with such... folk , I am very aware that once the public know where the risky person is then that person goes underground and the authorities risk losing track of them. As parents we can only do our best to safe gaurd our children, these people are sadly hiding within all our communities, they make great effort to enter our lives and many will wait decades before comitting an offence.
 
Bob

Bob

Well-Known Forumite
I would hate for something I said or did or though at the age of 10 to define the rest of my life. The way a 10 year olds brain functions is not the same as that of an adult, and their perception of pain, torture and death was not accurate, What they did to that poor little boy was horrific, they deserved to be locked up and if the key had been thrown away I wouldn’t be leading a campaign to free them, but the fact remains that they have been released, I’m sure with a case such as this the decision to release them has not been taken lightly and they are probably trying to get on with their lives as best they can.

I think there is need for these people to be anonymous, I don’t believe that living with the fear of an attack from a complete stranger, someone they have never met, that has no connection with the case or relationship to the Bulger family benefits anyone. What I do hope is that they are monitored carefully, if I were in charge I would have anyone that could be considered to be a danger to others tagged as condition of release.
 
tek-monkey

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
I think it comes back to what Withnail said about punishment having already been carried out, plus whether we consider rehabilitation to be relevant. Once someone has been freed, should they ever be allowed their life back? If not, why not just kill them? If they are, why force them into a situation where everyone judges them based on what they have already been punished for? Are you in fact setting up some low IQ'd person to commit a further offence by telling them they have a murderer/rapist/nonce living nearby, knowing they are likely to harm them?

I don't know what the solution is, but people are generally less intelligent than porcine manure in these situations and likely to do something rash. 3 teenagers were jailed for life recently for killing a paedo, because they found out about his past. That is 3 more lives chucked on the bonfire, who gives a job to a murderer?
 
Jade-clothing

Jade-clothing

Well-Known Forumite
tek-monkey said:
I think it comes back to what Withnail said about punishment having already been carried out, plus whether we consider rehabilitation to be relevant. Once someone has been freed, should they ever be allowed their life back? If not, why not just kill them? If they are, why force them into a situation where everyone judges them based on what they have already been punished for? Are you in fact setting up some low IQ'd person to commit a further offence by telling them they have a murderer/rapist/nonce living nearby, knowing they are likely to harm them?

I don't know what the solution is, but people are generally less intelligent than porcine manure in these situations and likely to do something rash. 3 teenagers were jailed for life recently for killing a paedo, because they found out about his past. That is 3 more lives chucked on the bonfire, who gives a job to a murderer?
Click to expand...

I watched a really interesting TV show once on whether or not people believed Paedophiles could be 'cured' as in integrated back into society and lead a normal life. This isn't related to that programme but it touches on some of what was mentioned - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5122240.stm
There was also a big discussion on what defines a paedophile, as most never touch a child - but rather prefer to look at images. It was really interesting.
 
Bob

Bob

Well-Known Forumite
The thing is these are teenagers, still children, you almost have to question their upbringing. The last thing on my mind at 16-19 was killing someone.
 
Bob

Bob

Well-Known Forumite
Jade-clothing said:
I watched a really interesting TV show once on whether or not people believed Paedophiles could be 'cured' as in integrated back into society and lead a normal life. This isn't related to that programme but it touches on some of what was mentioned - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5122240.stm
There was also a big discussion on what defines a paedophile, as most never touch a child - but rather prefer to look at images. It was really interesting.
Click to expand...

I can't believe that the BBC dedicate veiwing time to it, these documentries tend to frighten people into believing there is a child abuser around every corner when in fact incidents are rare.

I don't believe these people can be 'cured' anymore more than a gay person can be made to be straight or a straight person can be made gay. I'm not for a second suggesting being gay is in a ways shape or form anything like being a child abuser, simply using it as an example.
 
Jade-clothing

Jade-clothing

Well-Known Forumite
Bob said:
I can't believe that the BBC dedicate veiwing time to it, these documentries tend to frighten people into believing there is a child abuser around every corner when in fact incidents are rare.

I don't believe these people can be 'cured' anymore more than a gay person can be made to be straight or a straight person can be made gay. I'm not for a second suggesting being gay is in a ways shape or form anything like being a child abuser, simply using it as an example.
Click to expand...

I totally agree Bob. I believe there's a gay gene and I believe it's something similar for Paedophiles. I don't believe it's the same for murderers though as people do know right from wrong. I agree with Withnails views on this that people should be given a chance to rehabilitate once they have served their time.
 
Jade-clothing

Jade-clothing

Well-Known Forumite
Gramaisc said:
This sort of thing just sounds a bit bizarre - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-10693808 ..
Click to expand...
They don't always get sent to prison anyway as it is too expensive to keep them there due to needing to protect them from other prisoners dealing out 'punishment'. There's also a distinct difference between an offender who actually touches a child and one who looks at images although it could be argued that looking at images could lead on to physical contact eventually?
 
tek-monkey

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
I'd say the main issue is someone still abuses a child to take the photos?

Everyone has urges, whatever they may be, but they control those urges within the scope of the law to keep themselves integrated into society. Anyone unable to control those urges should be removed from society until such a time as those urges are no longer a problem. The problem is do you believe a nonce that says he'll never touch a kid again any more than a crack head who says he'll stop taking drugs? Hence minimum terms etc. to make sure the gravity of their lack of judgement is reflected.
 
tek-monkey

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
That is interesting! Although I suppose if they didn't everyone would claim the images were fake and therefore they could not be prosecuted?
 
John Marwood

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
Just a gentle reminder of the High Court judge Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss order which grants 'them ' anonymity for the rest of their lives .

And that posting on here is not in the least anonymous
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top