Letter: Crime. And punishment?
Thursday 11th March 2010, 7:17AM GMT.
Letter: I refer to the instances of serious offenders reoffending after release on the advice of experts and specifically to Jon Venables.
Isn’t is about time that we as a society came to realise, unpalatable though it may well be, that there are some who cannot be rehabilitated, and took appropriate action for the benefit of, not only the James Bulgers and the Baby Ps, but for people like the elderly couple in Warwickshire who had their mobility scooter torched and died from the toxic fumes.
While I’m not an advocate of indiscriminate use of the death penalty I do see the value in putting some of these lawless types to sleep. What would have been so wrong with sentencing Venables to death but suspending that for life, placing the ball firmly in his court and giving him the opportunity for rehabilitation but yet providing society with at least some guarantees.
John Harrison
Whitchurch
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Here we go AGAIN. Another serious offender released early to satisfy the bleeding heart brigade. This,( I’m stuck for words now), I can’t call him a person or a creature that would be an insult to creatures and people, but this “thing” should never have been allowed to walk the streets again. What those two did was totally unacceptable but they got away with it, a paltry sentence, help to re-locate etc.etc. I have previously posted that prisons are too “cushy” and sentences too short and I speak as an ex inmate. Until the judges start handing out prison terms that reflect the nature of the crime then this will happen again and again ad nauseum. People have said that Venable’s new identity should not be revealed as he would not get a fair trial. TOUGH, did they give little Jamie a fair trial?. Someone must tell judges to wake up and do their job, how many more such crimes will it take, too late for Jamie sadly but they could begin sending the message NOW.
Report abuse
John Harrison asks the question “What would have been so wrong with sentencing Venables to death but suspending that for life, placing the ball firmly in his court and giving him the opportunity for rehabilitation but yet providing society with at least some guarantees”. That question needs to be carefully considered and answered. Our society is being led by a tabloid sense of justice with regards to Jon Venables. Behind that is the power of the mob. Thankfully our laws and legal system are dictated by neither the press nor the lynch mob.
It would be useful for John Harrison to take a few steps back and consider his question in the light of all that we hold dear about the fairness of our society. Whatever the wrongness of his actions, Jon Venables, along with Robert Thompson, was a 10 year old CHILD. What they did was dreadfully wrong but in truth children who kill other children are extremely rare. Only Mary Bell in the late 1960s springs immediately to mind in modern British history so no example is going to be set by extreme punishment. These are freakish crimes borne out of a rare set of factors. Now in considering Mr Harrison’s suggestion of a death sentence deferred for life unless he re-offends I can think of little that would be more barbaric. Can you consider telling a 10 year old (your own children, grandchildren, nieces or nephews) that you won’t die yet but if in the future you do something wrong (anything) you will? And can you contemplate not only the magnitude of that for the child but how that would reflect upon us in our claim to be a civilised, fair, decent, and just society. On that basis we should amputate the hands of 10 year olds who steal sweets – but maybe give them a lifetime warning first and hold that in place for the rest of their days. Jon Venables (speculation aside) has been shown to be a serious risk to children only when he was a child in the company of Robert Thompson. Predatory and extremely dangerous adult offenders must be celebrating as the heat is off them thanks to the irrational response of press and public to someone who offended when he was a 4’6″ tall 10 year old boy.
Let us consider also Jon Venables right to anonymity. Only four offenders in this country have that legal right. The others are Robert Thompson, Mary Bell and Maxine Carr. Their anonymity is guaranteed for good reason because elements of the British public are quite irrational, unreasonable, irresponsible and idiotic. Text messages have circulated recently identifying Jon Venables as a David Calvert. The named (innocent) man has had his life made a misery. This is after all also the country where a paediatrician was hounded out of her home by a mob of imbeciles who couldn’t spell or read dictionaries. The final points on Jon Venables right (and need) to anonymity relate firstly to his safety. He has been sentenced for his original offence and it is not for others to re-sentence him to corporal or capital punishment. He may have been alleged to have committed a new offence. We do not as yet know if he has been charged. If he has been charged then that needs to follow the due process of our criminal justice system. He has the right to a fair trial and a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The rabid press coverage almost guarantees that no trial will take place. Now, if he has been accused of a serious offence how wrong is that for victims or justice?
Report abuse
Venables is a classic example that rehabilitation does not work which is why the home office will not give any other information – they’d have to admit the rehabilitation system does not work which would in turn begger the question how many more murderers, rapists and paedophiles are walking the streets after early release.
Report abuse
Simon – Thank you, at last someone writes some sense about Jon Venables. Unfortunately you won’t find much support, as the lynch mob you mention most definitely rules here!
SF & Colin D – Your predictable knee-jerk reactions tell me that you would be among the first to blame the Government if a new conviction against Venables failed because he wasn’t allowed a fair trial.
Face it the government has tried to do the right thing against a background of media fuelled public ignorance.
Report abuse
Simon raises some interesting points. Yes, Venables and Thompson were children but the very nature of their crime says that they were not normal children, is he saying they were unaware that what they did was wrong?. If so then they remain a potential risk as long as they live. A death sentence deferred for life is in Simons view barbaric. What they did to a 3 year old, hardly a child but still a baby, was worse than barbaric, it was inhuman. Evan wild animals do not kill for fun only to survive. Sorry Simon but I must join the irrational, unreasonable, irresponsible and idiotic brigade in saying these two should be put out of circulation for good.
Report abuse
Justice is a massive and (for some) very lucrative industry in the UK. Those within it cannot see the woods for the trees, but for those without – the victims of crime – it’s as clear as the nose on your face that justice is rarely administered satisfactorily. There’s too much bureaucracy, too much self interest and too little clear direction. The suffering of victims of crime invariably plays second fiddle to the human rights of the perpetrators. Victims have no such human rights. They don’t really suffer and they bleat far too loudly about justice. They should be more stoic. So says the Criminal Justice system. It’s a quagmire. Then, you have sentencing. Some TV Documentary producer should covertly film the reactions of some of those who have been sentenced. There’s very little deterrent and worse, there’s very little successful rehabilitation in prisons either. This is not the measure of a civilized society, but of a weak and indecisive one in decline. I agree that the tabloid witch hunt against John Venables is wrong, but I completely understand why it’s happening – unlike you more “enlightened” folks. Venables and Thompson should have been hung if they had been adults (yes, I would accept the responsibility of such a job), but since they were children, they should have been incarcerated for a mininimum of 25 years before being considered eligible for parole. Their crime was bestial and defied belief.
Report abuse
A few points to make about Venables. Firstly, he has not, as far as we know been charged with any criminal offence as part of his recall to prison. He has certainly not been charged with anything.
All we have to date is the speculation of unreliable tabloid newspapers.
Jack Straw is absolutely right in not revealing his identity, and in not making any statement that might lead to his identity being revealed, the principal reason being that this would completely undermine any possibility of a fair trial should he be charged.
It is also perfectly possible that he has been recalled for some reason that does not involve him having committed a further criminal offence. No-one recalled to prison from a life licence even needs to go before a court – you breach the conditions of your parole, even in a minor way, and you’re back in. It may be that Venables is not charged, that the terms of his licence are reviewed and adjusted, and that he is released to continue his life licence.
The various sweeping statements that ‘rehabilitation doesn’t work’ are simply not supported by fact for those on life licence – in fact the numbers who reoffend are very small – which must indicate that in the vast majority of cases it does work.
The letter writer claims that we do not have people who we acknowledge cannot be rehabilitated. This is just nonsense. What about Ian Brady? What about Peter Sutcliffe, Charles Bronson, Rose West, Dennis Neilsen, to name but a few. All are subject to ‘whole life’ terms and will never be released. We all acknowledge that none could ever be released. But if we are really saying that there is no point in trying to rehabilitate someone who commits a crime, no matter how terrible, at 10 years old, then we really do have a problem as a society.
Report abuse
if one is brought up in a tip and bereft of relious upbringing, how do we know if that 10 year old knew what he was doing, here is a pile of stones, who will be the first to throw one
Report abuse
Persona@4
Nothing ‘knee jerk’ about my reaction – I do actually think long and hard about my views before publishing them.
There was something wrong and unfixable with that boy many years before he killed otherwise he’d not have done it in the first place.
No amount of rehabiliation will make him fit to live within the normal confines of society – if that were possible he wouldn’t have to live in quite so much secrecy and no I do support vigilante attacks. I’ve deleted immediately the 3 text messages I’ve already received giving ‘cover’ names that Venables has apparently been living under – I do believe that these messages are causing a great deal of harm to innocent people
Report abuse
James Bulger would have been twenty this Tuesday, he never had a chance to live, love and experience a dawn, sunset or anything else.
Before any liberal do-gooders start talking about rehabilitation they should find out exactly what was done to James Bulger after he was taken while he was alive and concious, then decide whether the perpetrators should ever have been released back into society. (10 years old, at the time, or not).
Report abuse
I am the first to advocate longer and harder sentences (and that strictly un-PC word “punishments”) and in a lifetime of listening to various views on the subject, not once have i heard that a “suspended death sentence” should ever be passed on a 10 year old – or for that matter, anyone of any age. The idea is barbaric and preposterous.
Secondly, we do not know what the “conditions of release and license” imposed on Venables were, neither do we know what, if any he has broken or indeed what and if, is the crime that he may have committed. Much of what has been said above is pure opinion and conjecture therefore.
The extreme, isolated case of Venables/Thompson presents society with particularly difficult problems and, as things now stand, I have no complaint about the position that Jack Straw has taken. Had he gone off “half cocked” and blabbed to all and sundry what Venables had been up to with all the other information that the Sun and the News of the World were demanding, he could well have seriously compromised any possible criminal proceedings again the man.
The only complaint I have with regard to this issue so far is the short length of time that this pair were kept in prison, that is worthy of serious concern in my view. On the other hand, with two juvenile murderers, the authorities had them in custody sufficiently long to instill in them all the qualifications, both personal and academic to enable them to lead a good and useful life on discharge. They patently failed to do so in the case of Venables as has been borne out by his current position. We can only shout when we know all the facts and at present, we know nothing, short of the fact that he has been recalled to Prison.
Report abuse
i have just read today about britains youngest
prisoner aged 12—-12 who has an apalling crime record since before 11 will he learn
will e eck he will most likely be a tosser for life rule(broken)brittania
Report abuse
Persona. Knee jerk reaction???? I think not. This crime appalled me at the time and it appalls me now. Much has been made of their deprived upbringing etc. etc., how they were only children who did not realise that what they were doing was wrong yet they were crafty enough in placing that poor baby’s body on the rail track hoping that that would somehow disguise what they had done to him. To my very simple mind that says they knew exactly what they were doing, that it was wrong and that they needed to try to cover up what they had done. They were, and still are, nothing less than evil “beings” who deprived a baby of the rest of his life, too many people forget that fact. Risking the wrath of the “do-gooders” I can say in all honesty that I would have been more than willing to send those two into the next world, both then and now. They deprived that baby of his life and in doing so I believe they forfeited any rights they may have had. Perhaps the holier than thou clan ought to be put in touch with Jamie’s mother and listen to her side of it then see if they still feel the same way. If they do, then I feel very sorry for them. AND, YES, I do believe that even at ten years old they should have been put down for what they did, they are inhuman.
Report abuse
Colin.D
I too was appalled by the killing of James Bulger (his family never called him Jamie so why do you presume to), but I was able to take a step back then as now from the mentality of mob or state sanctioned vengeance.
You have no evidence that Thompson and Venables are “evil” now or that their behaviour then was any more than a freakish anomaly borne of particular circumstances. What they did was wrong, but we in the general public will never know how much they truly understood the nature and quality of their actions then, or that they understood the true finality and concept of death. They were sentenced and supposedly rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the parole board – probably with higher levels of expectation being required than normal. That Jon Venables has been recalled on licence means little because we do not know the reasons for this. Conjecture and speculation is not evidence.
Finally, what they did to James Bulger was a dreadful thing committed by children. The death of any child is awful. And yet with apparent glee you state that you would would happily kill not one but two children. In the criminal world those who harm children are nonces. What would such a deed make you. Your mother must be so proud.
Report abuse