Brighton priest defends comments about "innocent" Jon Venables (From The Argus)

Venables proved to the world at an early age he is evil to the core by what he did to James Bulgar, I'm afraid not amount of rehibilitation or 2nd/3rd/4th chances can turn him into a normal member of society. If the recent allegations are proved he should be locked up and NEVER released, any compassion I have goes to James Bulgar's mother and the victims of his most recent (alledged) offences. What happened to James Bulgar utterly sickened me at the time and still does to this day when I think about it, James Bulgars family are living a life sentence they didn't ask for or can escape from, the perpetrators of that crime should not be allowed to live a normal life amongst us and our children. It's about time normal law abiding members of society were protected, not the other way round.

It's precisely because the media and so many people refuse to debate the whys of incidents like this that we appear to have learned nothing in the last 17 years. Simply dismissing them as evil rather than engaging in a proper attempt to understand how incidents like this happen and what needs to be done to prevent them means it will happen again. Normal law abiding members of society will never be protected until you understand why they haven't been in the past. We all take responsibility therefore as a result.

Father Ray's comments aren't as clear-cut as your headline suggests. He blogs at http://www.marymagda
len.blogspot.com/ so if you go there you can join the debate and maybe learn something as well.

There are always two sides and I think that is all Father Blake is saying, plus that everybody involved in crime is a victim of some kind. We should consider the sort of society that we have become that results in 10 year old boys committing such a crime. Today we have the case of Peter Chapman who raped and murdered Ashleigh Hall after meeting on Facebook. We need to be looking seriously at people who seem to reject normal society and relationships for faceless friendships on the internet. The warnings are there. Children watch **** and violence without any parental controls. We should expect more cases like these unless we act to stop this. If China can limit the access to certain web sites then so can other countries.

yorkie44 wrote:
There are always two sides and I think that is all Father Blake is saying, plus that everybody involved in crime is a victim of some kind. We should consider the sort of society that we have become that results in 10 year old boys committing such a crime. Today we have the case of Peter Chapman who raped and murdered Ashleigh Hall after meeting on Facebook. We need to be looking seriously at people who seem to reject normal society and relationships for faceless friendships on the internet. The warnings are there. Children watch **** and violence without any parental controls. We should expect more cases like these unless we act to stop this. If China can limit the access to certain web sites then so can other countries.

And you would be happy for the government to start controlling access to the web and information just like they do in China?
.
It's terrible what some people use the internet for, but these sorts of things have been happening forever. and if Peter Chapman had not used the internet he would have used something else, just like people have done in the past. It's just the media that (ironically with the aid of the internet) like to blow things out of all proportion and instil a sense of fear into people, and you seem to have fallen for that.
.
The internet and it's freedoms should be kept at all costs and not given away with a knee-jerk reaction to states, we don't need the government to 'protect' us from the internet we need the internet to protect us from governments. It really is the best way people can stay informed and communicate away from all the other corrupt, money driven sources of news, unless of course you live in places like china.

I was there at the time and I remember the bloodthirsty locals in Bootle waiting for a chance to rip two ten year olds apart. The first time it was two other ten year old boys who were later released after their family homes had been ransacked and members of their family beaten up. These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old.
.
Now the media are revelling in a second chance to exploit the gore and the shock which they have always envied their older colleagues for enjoying in the past. They don't mind having to disinter an infants body in order to do it, and people are falling in like a medieval mob at a wicth burning.
.
When has anyone ever been arrested and tried for the crimes of a ten year old boy from 17 years ago?
.
rubymurray34, the childs name was Jamie Bulger, not Bulgar. Bulgar is an extinct language and a type of wheat. You are a type of chaff. Incase you didn't get it... they were ten years old!

bring back the death penalty and make some room in the jails for these sicko,s.

I notice that no byline is attached to this report - I wonder why.
.
Darth Formby, the child's name was James Bulger, 'Jamie' was a derivation given by the (mostly) tabloid press, never by his family.

This is a tabloid story and i expect better from the Argus. Its like its thriving on the sensationalism. Stories like this bring out the worts of the tabloid reading proletareat.

However i can see why you had to report it, its on the BBC news now.
It was a terrible thing that they did to that child, and when it happened i actually remember sobbing when it was revealed exactly what they did to him. However i am not one of the 'string em up' brigade.

I think the priest was not trying to defend him. He didnt state he thought he was innocent, he said 'innocent' meaning as much as we are all a product our upbringing. There is no such thing as 'evil', To say there is then that implies we have no free will and are not responsible for our own actions. We are. Nobody gained anything from the Jon Venables, except the tabloid rags really through increased sales, which is their only aim. It shouldnt have been made public knowledge.

Do the baying mobs not get the irony of trying to rip apart children? These same baying mobs who attack a paediatrician, and also scream about killing anyone who harms a child.

rubymurray34 wrote:
Venables proved to the world at an early age he is evil to the core by what he did to James Bulgar, I'm afraid not amount of rehibilitation or 2nd/3rd/4th chances can turn him into a normal member of society. If the recent allegations are proved he should be locked up and NEVER released, any compassion I have goes to James Bulgar's mother and the victims of his most recent (alledged) offences. What happened to James Bulgar utterly sickened me at the time and still does to this day when I think about it, James Bulgars family are living a life sentence they didn't ask for or can escape from, the perpetrators of that crime should not be allowed to live a normal life amongst us and our children. It's about time normal law abiding members of society were protected, not the other way round.

I most certainly echo your comments. Any ten year old who has the capacity to murder another child in cold blood deserves nothing but imprisonment for the rest of their nautural lives. Under these horrific circumstances they must never be given a second chance in life. Anyone who states that these two monsters were not responsible for their actions are deluded.

No child(or anyone else) who murders in cold blood is normal and society should be protected from them. The punishment as it stands for all who murder another human being in cold blood is wrong and an injustice to the victim and their family and I'm confident the majority of people in the UK would agree with that.

Darth Formby wrote:
I was there at the time and I remember the bloodthirsty locals in Bootle waiting for a chance to rip two ten year olds apart. The first time it was two other ten year old boys who were later released after their family homes had been ransacked and members of their family beaten up. These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old. . Now the media are revelling in a second chance to exploit the gore and the shock which they have always envied their older colleagues for enjoying in the past. They don't mind having to disinter an infants body in order to do it, and people are falling in like a medieval mob at a wicth burning. . When has anyone ever been arrested and tried for the crimes of a ten year old boy from 17 years ago? . rubymurray34, the childs name was Jamie Bulger, not Bulgar. Bulgar is an extinct language and a type of wheat. You are a type of chaff. Incase you didn't get it... they were ten years old!

"These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old."
Absolutely right. I remember seeing a clip of people trying to attack the police van carrying the boys. This was before they had been convicted of anything.
Mob rule is a total disgrace, and while I don't agree that it is worse than what Venables and Thompson did - it is equally inhuman, and it's always done by thickest, stupidest, tabloid reading idiots.
I also agree with everything cheezeburger says.

Darth Formby wrote:
I was there at the time and I remember the bloodthirsty locals in Bootle waiting for a chance to rip two ten year olds apart. The first time it was two other ten year old boys who were later released after their family homes had been ransacked and members of their family beaten up. These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old.
.
Now the media are revelling in a second chance to exploit the gore and the shock which they have always envied their older colleagues for enjoying in the past. They don't mind having to disinter an infants body in order to do it, and people are falling in like a medieval mob at a wicth burning.
.
When has anyone ever been arrested and tried for the crimes of a ten year old boy from 17 years ago?
.
rubymurray34, the childs name was Jamie Bulger, not Bulgar. Bulgar is an extinct language and a type of wheat. You are a type of chaff. Incase you didn't get it... they were ten years old!

You are quick to correct someone on a spelling, however, his name is James not Jamie. He was never called Jamie.

Why does anyone take any notice of a Catholic priest.
This church has a very poor reputation with regards to child protection.

Nyberg wrote:

Darth Formby wrote:
I was there at the time and I remember the bloodthirsty locals in Bootle waiting for a chance to rip two ten year olds apart. The first time it was two other ten year old boys who were later released after their family homes had been ransacked and members of their family beaten up. These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old. . Now the media are revelling in a second chance to exploit the gore and the shock which they have always envied their older colleagues for enjoying in the past. They don't mind having to disinter an infants body in order to do it, and people are falling in like a medieval mob at a wicth burning. . When has anyone ever been arrested and tried for the crimes of a ten year old boy from 17 years ago? . rubymurray34, the childs name was Jamie Bulger, not Bulgar. Bulgar is an extinct language and a type of wheat. You are a type of chaff. Incase you didn't get it... they were ten years old!

"These outraged decent citizens were a thousand times worse than either Venables or Thompson, who were ten years old."
Absolutely right. I remember seeing a clip of people trying to attack the police van carrying the boys. This was before they had been convicted of anything.
Mob rule is a total disgrace, and while I don't agree that it is worse than what Venables and Thompson did - it is equally inhuman, and it's always done by thickest, stupidest, tabloid reading idiots.
I also agree with everything cheezeburger says.

I wonder what those that attacked the van would do if face to face with a ten year old. Would they really attack a child?

Interestingly there was a similar case in Norway where they treated the offenders very very differently.

Sounds like he's endorsing what Venables did.Priests are good at forgiving paedophiles as well,so we shouldn't be too surprised at what he said .

To be honest he's taken the attitude that i expect most priests would, i.e. forgive them.

I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

How interesting Father Blake says 'we are what we are' when it comes to being a murderer but when it comes to being a gay man in Brighton he considers us the scourge of Society. This Priest is mighty mixed up!

Acheron wrote:
I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

cheezburger wrote:

Acheron wrote: I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

"It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults!"Will Self's talking garbage when he says this.ie;oh yes we do!

Pete Brighton, I think it is you who are 'mighty mixed up', not Father Blake! This is what he said about gay people on his blog last Thursday:

"I ask them if they believe what the Catholic Church teaches, they say "yes", they come to Mass, they go to confession, they pray, sometimes together; I can't see a problem. They support the Church, they tell me about their brothers and sisters, their nephews, their nieces, they regret they have never had children themselves; I feel sympathy. In the confessional they might tell me of the battle they have with their sexuality, sometimes of their defeats in this battle; I give absolution and a light penance, assure them of God's strength and often admire their extraordinary heroism and their great love of God and appreciation of his Grace."

So where did your phrase 'scourge of society' come from? (...your imagination, perhaps...)

Understandably, the priest makes an important omission:

"We are what we are, what our parents, our childhood, our experiences have made us, they are inescapable.
"We can run away from them into drink, drugs or hedonism of one sought (sic) or another", he says .... omitting the important option; his comment SHOULD have read: 'drink, drugs ... RELIGION' -- the opiate of the masses.

Catholic priest defending/feeling sorry for someone who has commited crimes against a child? - Surely not???

The Church doesn't condemn individuals. It offers compassion and forgiveness to everyone.

God still loves Jon Venables.

Surely, that is what Fr Ray is saying. We are all sinners and while Jon Venables crimes are great, God still loves him and wants to heal and forgive him.

Fr Ray is the model of a good priest.

The Argus is the model of an appalling newspaper.

Nyberg and sweepster, I honestly believe the crowd would have beaten them to death. The police station on Marsh Lane was under seige, and no traffic could pass because it was believed they were inside. There were large crowds all heading in the direction. That is why I consider it worse than the initial crime.
.
The first two children they tried to attack where mistakenly arrested and released later, but their houses were attacked and completely wrecked and members of their families badly hurt.
.
I met some of the same people from the lynch mob during the immediate aftermath. They were putting on their best clothes and hanging about in Likely spots, hoping to bump into one of the many tv crews in the area so they could 'get on the telly' One guy was really excited when he heard there was a Japanese tv crew.

kumquat wrote:
It's precisely because the media and so many people refuse to debate the whys of incidents like this that we appear to have learned nothing in the last 17 years. Simply dismissing them as evil rather than engaging in a proper attempt to understand how incidents like this happen and what needs to be done to prevent them means it will happen again. Normal law abiding members of society will never be protected until you understand why they haven't been in the past. We all take responsibility therefore as a result.

Very well said.. 99.9% agree on you're comment..silly little thing to go after but 'Normal' noone ones normal. But back to the point, society needs to get a grip and stop believing that englands so perfect, going into the same but diff point 'broken britain' was never fixed in the first place!

GreenGiant wrote:

kumquat wrote:
It's precisely because the media and so many people refuse to debate the whys of incidents like this that we appear to have learned nothing in the last 17 years. Simply dismissing them as evil rather than engaging in a proper attempt to understand how incidents like this happen and what needs to be done to prevent them means it will happen again. Normal law abiding members of society will never be protected until you understand why they haven't been in the past. We all take responsibility therefore as a result.

Very well said.. 99.9% agree on you're comment..silly little thing to go after but 'Normal' noone ones normal. But back to the point, society needs to get a grip and stop believing that englands so perfect, going into the same but diff point 'broken britain' was never fixed in the first place!

Spoken like a proper gentleman you both!

anubis wrote:
Understandably, the priest makes an important omission: "We are what we are, what our parents, our childhood, our experiences have made us, they are inescapable. "We can run away from them into drink, drugs or hedonism of one sought (sic) or another", he says .... omitting the important option; his comment SHOULD have read: 'drink, drugs ... RELIGION' -- the opiate of the masses.

What a load of nonsense. Religion may have been the opiate of the masses in the past, but anyone with half a brain can see that isn't the case now in the UK. Atheism is now the opiate of the masses. As Fr Blake has demonstrated, religion is one of the few parts in life where people are actively encouraged to think for themselves. The problem with what Fr Blake has written in the recent Argus stories about him is just a little too intellectual for those used to reading tabloids as their only form of mental (and other) stimulation.

One long tragedy, born into an inadequate family, at least five years in school where he failed to learn right from wrong, a small fortune spent on him in the penal system who naively thought they had turned him into a normal system. Why if he started doing drugs when he was released didn't they lock him up again then?

cheezburger wrote:
This is a tabloid story and i expect better from the Argus. Its like its thriving on the sensationalism. Stories like this bring out the worts of the tabloid reading proletareat. However i can see why you had to report it, its on the BBC news now. It was a terrible thing that they did to that child, and when it happened i actually remember sobbing when it was revealed exactly what they did to him. However i am not one of the 'string em up' brigade. I think the priest was not trying to defend him. He didnt state he thought he was innocent, he said 'innocent' meaning as much as we are all a product our upbringing. There is no such thing as 'evil', To say there is then that implies we have no free will and are not responsible for our own actions. We are. Nobody gained anything from the Jon Venables, except the tabloid rags really through increased sales, which is their only aim. It shouldnt have been made public knowledge. Do the baying mobs not get the irony of trying to rip apart children? These same baying mobs who attack a paediatrician, and also scream about killing anyone who harms a child.

silly, silly, silly suggestions

Do you REALLY expect the Argus not cover one of the biggest stories around?

jon s wrote:

cheezburger wrote:

Acheron wrote: I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

"It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults!"Will Self's talking garbage when he says this.ie;oh yes we do!

Jon S,

I'd beg to differ, it's only in the extreme cases do we turn adult murders into monsters, (the Wests, Shipman, etc). Last figures I could find was there were 648 murders in the statistical year 2008/9 (happily a falling number!). How many of them hit the national news and have mobs wanting to tear them limb from limb.

Is one murder not as bad as any other?

GreenGiant wrote:

kumquat wrote: It's precisely because the media and so many people refuse to debate the whys of incidents like this that we appear to have learned nothing in the last 17 years. Simply dismissing them as evil rather than engaging in a proper attempt to understand how incidents like this happen and what needs to be done to prevent them means it will happen again. Normal law abiding members of society will never be protected until you understand why they haven't been in the past. We all take responsibility therefore as a result.

Very well said.. 99.9% agree on you're comment..silly little thing to go after but 'Normal' noone ones normal. But back to the point, society needs to get a grip and stop believing that englands so perfect, going into the same but diff point 'broken britain' was never fixed in the first place!

Should point out that when i said "normal" i was only quoting the first poster. I was working as a journalist in Liverpool and actually attended the trial at the time and some of the details have never been published. These boys had no chance from the day they were born and until people understand they did what they did because of the way they were brought up nothing will change. The local council social services had chance after chance to save Robert Thompson in particular and failed and we need to understand why. As long as people continue to just shout "they're evil, hang them" none of this will be addressed. We need to firstly look long at hard at why some parents who are totally unequipped to have children are not helped properly. Secondly, if we move towards a system that involves more local power which we are already doing and will continue to do so whether the Tories or Labour are the next Government, then these problems will be exacerbated because individual councils will be left to make their own decisions on children's services with less checks on their performance. These are serious issues that if addressed will benefit the whole of society. As Blake Morrrison said in his book on the trial, this seems on the surface to be a story about children but in reality it's about adults. We are all responsible.

Entirely right kumquat!
.
Stan Bailey. The streets would be deserted if we locked people up for 'doing drugs'

A priest of the Christian faith preaching about forgiveness? Shock horror. Next the Argus will be reporting that they think Jesus was a pretty nifty bloke.

Tye wrote:

cheezburger wrote:
This is a tabloid story and i expect better from the Argus. Its like its thriving on the sensationalism. Stories like this bring out the worts of the tabloid reading proletareat. However i can see why you had to report it, its on the BBC news now. It was a terrible thing that they did to that child, and when it happened i actually remember sobbing when it was revealed exactly what they did to him. However i am not one of the 'string em up' brigade. I think the priest was not trying to defend him. He didnt state he thought he was innocent, he said 'innocent' meaning as much as we are all a product our upbringing. There is no such thing as 'evil', To say there is then that implies we have no free will and are not responsible for our own actions. We are. Nobody gained anything from the Jon Venables, except the tabloid rags really through increased sales, which is their only aim. It shouldnt have been made public knowledge. Do the baying mobs not get the irony of trying to rip apart children? These same baying mobs who attack a paediatrician, and also scream about killing anyone who harms a child.

silly, silly, silly suggestions

Do you REALLY expect the Argus not cover one of the biggest stories around?

Did you actually read what i wrote, or did you just speed type your usual moan about anyone who isnt you? Any idiot who read it can see that i understand that it was reported. I am questioning why it was reported the way it was. Incidentally its not one of the biggest stories around. The story is a local priest making a comment on his blog about a crime. That is the story. The Jon Venables part is a national story, not a local one. Your complete lack of understanding of anything is just becoming embarrasing so please leave topical debate to those with something to say.

Acheron wrote:

jon s wrote:

cheezburger wrote:

Acheron wrote: I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

"It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults!"Will Self's talking garbage when he says this.ie;oh yes we do!

Jon S, I'd beg to differ, it's only in the extreme cases do we turn adult murders into monsters, (the Wests, Shipman, etc). Last figures I could find was there were 648 murders in the statistical year 2008/9 (happily a falling number!). How many of them hit the national news and have mobs wanting to tear them limb from limb. Is one murder not as bad as any other?

A baying mob is not the barometer of the heinousness of a murder.The reason you only name two monsters,is you've forgotten the rest.One murder is not as bad as any other,not even in the eyes of the law.Murder a tramp and you'll get a fortnight in the Bahamas,murder a cop and you'll get 30 years.

scthetruth wrote:

rubymurray34 wrote:
Venables proved to the world at an early age he is evil to the core by what he did to James Bulgar, I'm afraid not amount of rehibilitation or 2nd/3rd/4th chances can turn him into a normal member of society. If the recent allegations are proved he should be locked up and NEVER released, any compassion I have goes to James Bulgar's mother and the victims of his most recent (alledged) offences. What happened to James Bulgar utterly sickened me at the time and still does to this day when I think about it, James Bulgars family are living a life sentence they didn't ask for or can escape from, the perpetrators of that crime should not be allowed to live a normal life amongst us and our children. It's about time normal law abiding members of society were protected, not the other way round.

I most certainly echo your comments. Any ten year old who has the capacity to murder another child in cold blood deserves nothing but imprisonment for the rest of their nautural lives. Under these horrific circumstances they must never be given a second chance in life. Anyone who states that these two monsters were not responsible for their actions are deluded.

No child(or anyone else) who murders in cold blood is normal and society should be protected from them. The punishment as it stands for all who murder another human being in cold blood is wrong and an injustice to the victim and their family and I'm confident the majority of people in the UK would agree with that.

At least you're a consistent idiot. I admire that in people.

Skippah wrote:

yorkie44 wrote: There are always two sides and I think that is all Father Blake is saying, plus that everybody involved in crime is a victim of some kind. We should consider the sort of society that we have become that results in 10 year old boys committing such a crime. Today we have the case of Peter Chapman who raped and murdered Ashleigh Hall after meeting on Facebook. We need to be looking seriously at people who seem to reject normal society and relationships for faceless friendships on the internet. The warnings are there. Children watch **** and violence without any parental controls. We should expect more cases like these unless we act to stop this. If China can limit the access to certain web sites then so can other countries.

And you would be happy for the government to start controlling access to the web and information just like they do in China? . It's terrible what some people use the internet for, but these sorts of things have been happening forever. and if Peter Chapman had not used the internet he would have used something else, just like people have done in the past. It's just the media that (ironically with the aid of the internet) like to blow things out of all proportion and instil a sense of fear into people, and you seem to have fallen for that. . The internet and it's freedoms should be kept at all costs and not given away with a knee-jerk reaction to states, we don't need the government to 'protect' us from the internet we need the internet to protect us from governments. It really is the best way people can stay informed and communicate away from all the other corrupt, money driven sources of news, unless of course you live in places like china.

You miss the point entirely with this left wing rant. The freedom given by the internet is a delusion. Who is going to protect the children from the internet?

I'm the one who commented as far as letting people rot in prison.

Gee, I know it's a strain on reporter types to actually do a bit of fact checking that would have taken you all of 30 seconds, but you seem to assume that I am one of Fr. Blake's parishioners.

In fact, I even laid down a clue trail for you:

A) the terms I'd used in my postings included the words "locally" and "FBI". Now a really SHARP reporter might have thought "does the UK have an FBI?" No? Well, then perhaps the reporter may have asked "where IS the FBI?" And most people in the news business not living under a rock would know the answer. "the US" - a little click on my handle on the blog comment itself would have revealed my profile, which states that I live in San Diego, California. A fine city, but, oh, thousands of miles west of Brighton. A tricky commute for Sunday Mass, even you must admit. It might have been wise to drop me a line saying something like "you don't happen to be an airline pilot with a regular run between San Diego and England, with time for a regular Sunday visit to Brighton?" But alas, you failed this simple exercise of Brain power.

FWIW, I largely do agree with Fr. Blake in that Venables was also a victim. All I simply meant by the "rot" comment was that if "Venables" is found guilty of this new crime, then I think he should serve the MAX time for it. In short "rot." A rotten deal in life he himself may have been subjected to prior to the age of 10..,..but any decent justice system STILL HAS the obligation to protect the public. I disagree with Fr. Blake in that I think if he is found guilty, he SHOULD be in prison. People not in prison have a tendency to be free to roam to commit still more crimes on an innocent populace.

Clear?

FWIW, I think that one day in the future after Fr. Blake is dead and gone, it would suprise me none if he's formally put forward for recognition as a saint

Fr. Blake has some 2-3 thousand readers around the globe.

Darth Formby wrote:
Entirely right kumquat!
.
Stan Bailey. The streets would be deserted if we locked people up for 'doing drugs'

there is a worrying trend, lots of people do drugs so it must be Ok, students play load music through the night so it must be Ok, people drive without insurance or shop lift. If enough do it does it make it OK?

Is it just me, or have the eyes in the photo of Venables been doctored by the media to make him look evil?

jon s wrote:

Acheron wrote:

jon s wrote:

cheezburger wrote:

Acheron wrote: I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

"It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults!"Will Self's talking garbage when he says this.ie;oh yes we do!

Jon S, I'd beg to differ, it's only in the extreme cases do we turn adult murders into monsters, (the Wests, Shipman, etc). Last figures I could find was there were 648 murders in the statistical year 2008/9 (happily a falling number!). How many of them hit the national news and have mobs wanting to tear them limb from limb. Is one murder not as bad as any other?

A baying mob is not the barometer of the heinousness of a murder.The reason you only name two monsters,is you've forgotten the rest.One murder is not as bad as any other,not even in the eyes of the law.Murder a tramp and you'll get a fortnight in the Bahamas,murder a cop and you'll get 30 years.

I can name far more than the two that I listed, but I doubt that people will thank me for a long list of murderers on the forum, so please, let's not be throwing about personal insults, I've not stooped to that level, I've just said I disagree and given a justification for it.

As to the example of the difference in terms of murdering a tramp vs murdering a policeman, yes you are right that you may well get different sentences, but I'd argue that is something that is wrong with the law, and it tells us that some people's lives are worth more than others.

ekim wrote:
Is it just me, or have the eyes in the photo of Venables been doctored by the media to make him look evil?

What is it they say, the eyes are the window to your soul!! As for Venables upbringing, yes I'm sure it played some part in his appalling crime but it certainly doesn't excuse it, thousands of kids have difficult childhoods but very few take it upon themselves to abduct a 2yr old toddler and batter them to death. Whilst in the eyes of the law, he was only a child himself, he was 11 for gods sake, he knew perfectly well what he was doing was wrong but still went ahead and did it. I only hope everytime Venables and Thompson close their eyes they see little James Bulgers battered body lying on the train track, a result of their handy work. One day if the authorities allow, they may have children of their own and hopefully feel the love a parent has for their child, only then they may understand why their crime so revolted the nation and still does to this day.

Why is it that when a man kills his own children and his partner it doesn't raise the same clamour? Surely that is a far worse crime?

"As for Venables upbringing, yes I'm sure it played some part in his appalling crime but it certainly doesn't excuse it, thousands of kids have difficult childhoods but very few take it upon themselves to abduct a 2yr old toddler and batter them to death"

This sort of ill-thought argument is why the press get away with the things they say.
1) Nobody is saying their upbringing excuses what they did. That's why there were tried and found guilty. Nobody disputes that. The issue is how could we have stopped it happening in the first place and how can we stop it happening again.
2) Thousands of kids have difficult childhoods and don't do this sort of thing is simply a statement that absolves us of taking responsibility for dealing properly with the incidents where they do do it.

Acheron wrote:

jon s wrote:

Acheron wrote:

jon s wrote:

cheezburger wrote:

Acheron wrote: I'd recommend watching in iPlayer last weeks Question Time when the Venables question was raised, particularly some of Will Self's comments. It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults! (Watch it to see more about what he said on the issue, am not going to debate it now).

Baying mobs who scream for the heads of people who harm children are strangely silent when its an adult who was killed. I've never understood that. Some murderers, in the eyes of the tabloids, are better or worse than other murderers.

"It's interesting how we make children who murder 'monsters' but don't make the same fuss about adults!"Will Self's talking garbage when he says this.ie;oh yes we do!

Jon S, I'd beg to differ, it's only in the extreme cases do we turn adult murders into monsters, (the Wests, Shipman, etc). Last figures I could find was there were 648 murders in the statistical year 2008/9 (happily a falling number!). How many of them hit the national news and have mobs wanting to tear them limb from limb. Is one murder not as bad as any other?

A baying mob is not the barometer of the heinousness of a murder.The reason you only name two monsters,is you've forgotten the rest.One murder is not as bad as any other,not even in the eyes of the law.Murder a tramp and you'll get a fortnight in the Bahamas,murder a cop and you'll get 30 years.

I can name far more than the two that I listed, but I doubt that people will thank me for a long list of murderers on the forum, so please, let's not be throwing about personal insults, I've not stooped to that level, I've just said I disagree and given a justification for it. As to the example of the difference in terms of murdering a tramp vs murdering a policeman, yes you are right that you may well get different sentences, but I'd argue that is something that is wrong with the law, and it tells us that some people's lives are worth more than others.

"As to the example of the difference in terms of murdering a tramp vs murdering a policeman, yes you are right that you may well get different sentences, but I'd argue that is something that is wrong with the law",agree with that.In my opinion,a policeman's life is not any more important than mine,although the authorities deem it so.My question to them would be,how so?