Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
I expect Lord Longford`s ghost is floating about somwhere now, unable to understand why we`re so hostile and unforgiving toward`s this little (big now) B.....d! Another 5 years, and he`ll be older and be given another chance I suspect. Hopefully, one of the inmate`s may be able to get their hands on him.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
I think it is possible to forgive and still incarcerate. Forgiving doesn't mean letting off or not recognising the risks. It means not allowing stuff to take over your life and poison it. Sometimes forgiving reinforces the need to reduce the risk and restrict freedoms. Some people have a real need to be protected from themselves and their own warped instincts.
So Bern, how are we to protect ourselves from the Ilford Inquisitor aka Howard? Surely if we forgive him, it will just make things worse?
Only kidding, good post Bern.
There is no protection from Howard, Sid. We just accept the inevitable!
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
So, according to what I`ve just read on the news bits on yahoo whilst logging on, Gordon Brown is in agreement with Jim Straw that it would not be in the public interest to know what that B.....d Venable`s has been up to whilst on parole. Can anybody tell me, if only through speculation, what possible reasons could that be for, as I`m at a total loss?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,699
Due process?
Innocent until proven guilty?
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
basically any media over kill will render a criminal trial very difficult as the jury would be unduly influenced.
justice has to be meted out with a cool head/s.
Justice, hmm, now there's a concept.
Sentence served for kidnapping, torturing, stoning to death, laying victims body on rail track to get cut in half; now let me see. Life imprisonment, but you'll only do 8 years, that's what you get for being a naughty boy.
If that's justice I'll eat Andy's hat.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
what do you suggest sid, the media feeding the frenzied mob with the address and photograph of the accused?
of course, the judiciary sometimes come across with ludicrous sentences, they are completely out of touch with the majority of the population.
lynch mobs are hardly an improvement though.
Guest 672- Registered: 3 Jun 2008
- Posts: 2,119
This could be a good idea.
grass grows by the inches but dies by the feet.
Sid - I can only agree. Not with a lynch mob, but with life inside for some people. If they pose too great a risk - and it is highly likely that this young man does - their right to freedom is not as great as societies right to safety. And that risk needs to be assessed by someone who knows stuff, not a social worker or psychiatrist who will, inevitably, be taken in by what they want to hear. I know - I have seen it in action at work.
Bern the voice of sanity, THANK YOU!
We don't need lynch mobs, just criminals to serve their time or to stay behind bars indefintely for the worst cases, Hindley, Sutcliffe et al.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I'm comfortable with Ian's posting.
Roger
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
I view the whole case as if it were one of my children, and I won`t put on here, or get into any argument`s as to what I`d like to do, or have other`s do to the B.....d. The cost of keeping him would be much better spent elsewhere.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
Just read a news item on here that the government has ruled out raising the prosecution age of children for crimes from 10 years old to 12 year`s old. They believe that a child of 10 can differentiate as to what is a serious crime. Seems like Maggie Atkinson, the children`s commissioner for England, prefer`s to defend the like`s of Venable`s as opposed to the poor innocent children like James Bulger, who have to suffer abuse and everything else. Let it be your kid`s Atkinson, and see what your view will be then. Like Vic and other`s on here, I did find this case very disturbing at the time, as I do now, and I won`t ever go `soft`.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
My son was the same age as poor James Bulger when it happened. It was as if my own heart had been ripped out. God only knows what that poor woman went through, and is still going through. Even now I sometimes look at my son and thank God it wasn't him. That event has stayed in our minds.
To be fair to Maggie Atkinson she was trying to get our laws on this in sync with those in the rest of the EU. However, she has to be some sort of insensitive twerp to suggest such a thing at this time.
Her timing demonstrates an incredible lack of judgement and sensitivity, and for that reason I support Mrs Bulger's claim that she should lose her job.
This was no ordinary childrens crime and the decision to try the monsters in an adult court was spot on in my view.
Sadly, the do-good, forgive and forget fraternity who run our prisons and sentencing didn't insist on the murderers being locked away for life. Let's hope someone else doesn't lose their life as a result.
It's that thing about risks again - which risk outweighs the other. If the risk to the rest of us outweighs the risk to the perps human rights, the perp goes away! And yes, Atkinsons judgement is severely brought into question and as yu say, for that reason alone she should go. What was she thinking? More pertinently, what was she thinking with?!
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
Bern's phrase "It was as if my own heart had been ripped out" sums it up perfectly for me, too. I'm not moved to tears by newspapers that often, but I was over this story. I suspect that Maggie Atkinson's words may yet cost her her job (and so they damn well should), but it's exactly the sort of soft touch on crime that I have always suspected New Labour of, and I expect I'm not alone. I can almost visualise Gordon Brown burying his head in his hands when he heard of this, and so close to an election, too.
True friends stab you in the front.
Blue or Red they will say whatever it takes to get elected. I imagine Cameron and Brown would promise Unicorns for all and bio fuel made of orphans tears if they were to be elected. It is n't that they are "soft on crime" but they all - from all sides of the political divide - just get it wrong because they don't believe what they say, they just say it because they have to.
