Jon Venables loses parole board bid to be freed from jail

atypical_boro said:
I don't think anyone is sticking up for them, but you can't bring the death penalty back just for 'child killers' (who are actual children) that you deem to be more evil than anyone else.

Easier to just leave the death penalty alone and keep them locked up until they've served their (hopefully very long) sentences. Unless, of course, one happens to be a full-on nonce, as with this case.
Click to expand...
I don't want the death penalty back. Just saying 10 year olds know better and them two should never see the light of day.
 
dontheking said:
People that are saying people on here are worse than them. What a joke.
Click to expand...
If you mean me say it, be a big boy. Bless.

It is not sticking up for them to want them to pay the full penalty of the law for what they did (and are doing). Wanting to execute someone for something they did as a ten year old is pretty sick. I was using hyperbole to illustrate the ludicrous desire to kill someone just to make an adult feel better. Because when you get down to it that is all that is at the root of the stated desire to have them killed. It won't bring back the poor little lad they murdered (who you may notice is never mentioned in this) it is such a rare crime (child killing another child) that is hardly an arguable deterrent and as the judicial killing of a human being is necessarily expensive and time consuming there is no fiscal argument. By any measure the death penalty for this crime is simply to make the poor offended adults feel all big and brave and angry about something that understandably they find distressing and upsetting but seem to be unable to articulate other than through a desire for more killing.
 
The worst part about this case for me was that these two scumbags didn't even spend time in an adult prison for the horrific murder of James. They were in a secure unit and Venables was taken on trips to watch Manchester United and given privileges such as a brand new Playstation 2 which a lot of kids at that time wouldn't have had. He probably had a better childhood in there than he would've had on the outside. It was no punishment whatsoever and I really feel for James' family who were badly let down by the system.
 
Muttley said:
If you mean me say it, be a big boy. Bless.

It is not sticking up for them to want them to pay the full penalty of the law for what they did (and are doing). Wanting to execute someone for something they did as a ten year old is pretty sick. I was using hyperbole to illustrate the ludicrous desire to kill someone just to make an adult feel better. Because when you get down to it that is all that is at the root of the stated desire to have them killed. It won't bring back the poor little lad they murdered (who you may notice is never mentioned in this) it is such a rare crime (child killing another child) that is hardly an arguable deterrent and as the judicial killing of a human being is necessarily expensive and time consuming there is no fiscal argument. By any measure the death penalty for this crime is simply to make the poor offended adults feel all big and brave and angry about something that understandably they find distressing and upsetting but seem to be unable to articulate other than through a desire for more killing.
Click to expand...
I think it’s worth remembering that this has always been a highly emotive subject, because most people can easily attempt to empathise with the parents, if they’re parents themselves.

People say things they don’t really mean, I doubt if anyone on this board could drop the axe on a ten year old if it really came down to it. Or on an adult for that matter, unless they were related to the actual victim.

What is interesting is that some people commenting on this subject (not on here but in general) seem to imply, perhaps unconsciously, that those 2 are worse or “more evil” than adult killers who’ve also killed 2 year olds. They’re all as bad as each other, really. Though the adults who do it are definitely 100% responsible for their actions.
 
B_G said:
It's morally wrong to execute anyone but especially a person who committed a crime at 10YO. I can't believe anyone would consider executing a child or keep them alive for 8 years and then execute them. Both scenarios are abhorrent.

For a ten year old child to commit the crimes they had, they must have been exposed to a horrific childhood themselves. Those were learned behaviours not instinctual.
Click to expand...
They may have been exposed to a horrific childhood but I doubt they witnessed a family member torturing and murdering a young child.

Whatever may have happened in their childhoods, one of them has concocted a plan in his evil mind to torture and murder a four year old, and the other has agreed to participate in it.
 
atypical_boro said:
People say things they don’t really mean, I doubt if anyone on this board could drop the axe on a ten year old if it really came down to it. Or on an adult for that matter, unless they were related to the actual victim.
Click to expand...
Precisely.

We will now get a lot of nonsense telling us what went on in the minds of these "evil ten year olds"...
 
parmoboy said:
They may have been exposed to a horrific childhood but I doubt they witnessed a family member torturing and murdering a young child.

Whatever may have happened in their childhoods, one of them has concocted a plan in his evil mind to torture and murder a four year old, and the other has agreed to participate in it.
Click to expand...
But if you execute child killers, you pretty much have to execute all killers. Then you’re back to what we had in the past; which involves cases of mistaken identity etc.

It would be mental to bring in a law that ONLY children who kill should get the chop, and adults just do a 30 stretch.
 
atypical_boro said:
But if you execute child killers, you pretty much have to execute all killers. Then you’re back to what we had in the past; which involves cases of mistaken identity etc.

It would be mental to bring in a law that ONLY children who kill should get the chop, and adults just do a 30 stretch.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with his point regarding it being morally wrong to execute children.

I disagreed with the point he made regarding it being learnt behaviour, relating to experiences from their childhood.

I believe some are just born evil, and I'd place those two scumbags into that category.
 
parmoboy said:
Yeah, I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with his point regarding it being morally wrong to execute children.

I disagreed with the point he made regarding it being learnt behaviour, relating to experiences from their childhood.

I believe some are just born evil, and I'd place those two scumbags into that category.
Click to expand...
It’s an age old debate, nature v nurture. I suspect it’s a bit of both with these guys, but I’m no expert.
 
atypical_boro said:
I basically agree. But some do want the death penalty back and I don’t think anyone was defending the 2 killers, only arguing against capital.
Click to expand...
1finny seemed keen to make some sort of point. He didn't elaborate but it looked like he was blaming 'the system' as opposed to Venables. He was pretty vague so I might be wrong.
 
Rofesleg said:
1finny seemed keen to make some sort of point. He didn't elaborate but it looked like he was blaming 'the system' as opposed to Venables. He was pretty vague so I might be wrong.
Click to expand...
I think his overaching point that *something* has gone wrong, is a perfectly legitimate one.
 
Muttley said:
If you mean me say it, be a big boy. Bless.

It is not sticking up for them to want them to pay the full penalty of the law for what they did (and are doing). Wanting to execute someone for something they did as a ten year old is pretty sick. I was using hyperbole to illustrate the ludicrous desire to kill someone just to make an adult feel better. Because when you get down to it that is all that is at the root of the stated desire to have them killed. It won't bring back the poor little lad they murdered (who you may notice is never mentioned in this) it is such a rare crime (child killing another child) that is hardly an arguable deterrent and as the judicial killing of a human being is necessarily expensive and time consuming there is no fiscal argument. By any measure the death penalty for this crime is simply to make the poor offended adults feel all big and brave and angry about something that understandably they find distressing and upsetting but seem to be unable to articulate other than through a desire for more killing.
Click to expand...
What you on about be a big boy , strange comment.
 
Norman_Conquest said:
I was counselling a lad who had been in and out of secure accommodation since his early teens. He told me that he wanted to be back inside due to the routine he had and that he got regular meals. On the outside, he couldn't cope and within weeks of him telling me, he re-offended and got his wish.
Click to expand...
A client I worked with used to always cause criminal damage at least two days before Christmas, because he knew the cops would shove him in the cells [he had lots of "previous"] He would be warm and get his Christmas dinner. It worked, but otherwise he lived on the streets.
 
The one thing that is undoubtedly weird about this case, and manifested on this thread, is that people do appear to think this is a more egregious crime because the perpetrators were so young. Whereas it is surely apparent that this works the other way. An adult with a fully formed sense of responsibility is far more responsible for their actions than a child.

It is when adults of fully developed and sound mind murder people that we should throw away the key if we ever should, and that we should contemplate the ultimate penalty if we ever should. It is when immature children do so that we should be most inclined to be sympathetic and most determined to find a means to reform and rehabilitate. It is completely irrational that this case produces the opposite bias.
 
I have always wondered what the hell happened during these kids's childhood that could turn them into sadistic murderers. Were their parents ever made to take some responsibility?
Or are they both freaks of nature?
 
FishofContemplation said:
The one thing that is undoubtedly weird about this case, and manifested on this thread, is that people do appear to think this is a more egregious crime because the perpetrators were so young. Whereas it is surely apparent that this works the other way. An adult with a fully formed sense of responsibility is far more responsible for their actions than a child.

It is when adults of fully developed and sound mind murder people that we should throw away the key if we ever should, and that we should contemplate the ultimate penalty if we ever should. It is when immature children do so that we should be most inclined to be sympathetic and most determined to find a means to reform and rehabilitate. It is completely irrational that this case produces the opposite bias.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I said above, though not sure it has fully manifested on here.

But it’s the idea that they are more “evil” because they did something so young, and somehow worse than if they’d grown up to be 30 years old and killed a child because, I dunno, they were getting on their nerves a bit like that harlot in Birmingham who killed her step son.

Anyway, it’s a hideous case that will hopefully never be repeated.
 
MoggasDog said:
I have always wondered what the hell happened during these kids's childhood that could turn them into sadistic murderers. Were their parents ever made to take some responsibility?
Or are they both freaks of nature?
Click to expand...
Chucky was one of the reasons cited wasn’t it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top