Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home

by Guest Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:53 am

First topic message reminder :

Two teenage girls have been found guilty of murdering a 39-year-old woman in her own home. The pair, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were convicted of the murder of alcoholic Angela Wrightson by a jury at Leeds Crown Court. The teenagers were aged 13 and 14 when they killed Wrightson in December 2014.

Wrightson was found dead in her blood-spattered living room in Hartlepool, County Durham, with more than 100 injuries.

Both girls were in tears after the verdicts and were led from the dock immediately.

The seven-week trial heard that the girls used a variety of weapons, including a coffee table and a computer printer, to carry out the “sustained and brutal” attack over a prolonged period.

Wrightson was found naked from the waist down and grit and shards of glass had been scattered over her, jurors heard.

The teenagers beat Wrightson to death over a period of several hours, before phoning police and asking for a lift home. While being transported in the police van they took a selfie, the jury heard.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/teenage-girls-found-guilty-of-angela-wrightson-murder_uk_5703c639e4b069ef5c00df92?utm_hp_ref=uk

Hope the Judge hits them with the longest sentence possible

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:32 pm

restorative justice

Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 3489511464

ok lets see you "restore" that poor woamn then sassy....I'll come and watch your "jesus" act....

by eddie Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Are some people seriously arguing that all murderers must have done it because of a shitty upbringing etc...!?

And must therefore be treated as 'victims'...!?

Or is that just reserved as special treatment for some based on gender...!?

Tommy do you think that young people can change?

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:34 pm

Lord Foul wrote:dunno if it works at all or not...BUT even ONE failure is putting the rest of society at risk....

why do it?

its just the same argument the left use for immigration...

Oh YOU (thats you out there, mr average) YOU can take the risks involved in our "feel good" policies whether you like it or not...WE (the left) dont care ....we are happy to let the killers out without proper supervision, without any PROOF positive that they are now safe and if YOU or yours is killed/maimed....bloody tough luck , screw you we dont care, it makes US (the left) feel all empowered and righteous

Isn't it the leftie system that has failed here in both sides... leaving this vulnerable woman out on her own and not intervening when it was well known that she was heavily drinking and also buying booze for children to cone back to her place to drink etc... plus then allowing these two girls to be out drinking at all hours too etc...!?

by Guest Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:36 pm

Funny, been no 'leftie' system for 6 years, only cutbacks of social services and help for alcoholics and drug addicts by this government. The 'leftie system' excuse has run so thin it's laughable.

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:40 pm

the "justice" system is still largely a lefty legacy...no two ways about it....

forced onwards by lefty dominated EU and its ridiculous "rights"

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:40 pm

Lord Foul wrote:restorative justice

ok lets see you "restore" that poor woamn then sassy....I'll come and watch your "jesus" act....

by eddie Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:41 pm

Vic don't you think that the girls deserve at least one chance to change after receiving help?
They're only young.

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:45 pm

ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:46 pm

Eddie... they had plenty of chances to stop beating this poor woman with tables and chairs and the TV etc...

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:48 pm

I mean, perhaps myra hindly should have had early release.... Rolling Eyes

after all....she said she had changed........ Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2190311264

Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2190311264

by eddie Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:51 pm

So you both, Tommy and Vic, feel that these young people (and let's not forget the fact these young people have lived a shitty existence) don't deserve a chance to be helped and restored?
You think that at this age, they had all the faculties in place to make the correct decision?

I am not excusing their behaviour, I'm saying that what is the alternative? To say "You didn't turn out right, fuck the reason why, so just rot"???

by Tommy Monk Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:57 pm

We're not talking about a little bit of naughty behaviour though eddie...

And we're not talking about either being locked in a dungeon with key thrown away...

They will be getting plenty of 'help' while also securely held away from being a danger to the rest of the general public...

by Victorismyhero Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:59 pm

Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

by eddie Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:59 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:We're not talking about a little bit of naughty behaviour though eddie...

And we're not talking about either being locked in a dungeon with key thrown away...

They will be getting plenty of 'help' while also securely held away from being a danger to the rest of the general public...

Yes and that's what I've been saying? They need to be dealt with and helped too.

by veya_victaous Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:00 am

eddie wrote:So you both, Tommy and Vic, feel that these young people (and let's not forget the fact these young people have lived a shitty existence) don't deserve a chance to be helped and restored?
You think that at this age, they had all the faculties in place to make the correct decision?

I am not excusing their behaviour, I'm saying that what is the alternative? To say "You didn't turn out right, fuck the reason why, so just rot"???

i would suggest that one of them not fixable
from my limited knowledge of the crime it had the hallmarks of a thrill killer, those people will always be a danger to society

But I would be willing to give the benifit of the doubt the the 'follower' Rolling Eyes

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:05 am

Veya... following your line for a sec... Maybe the 'leader' would never have ever actually done anything to anyone without the encouragement of the 'follower'...!?

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:05 am

eddie wrote:So you both, Tommy and Vic, feel that these young people (and let's not forget the fact these young people have lived a shitty existence) don't deserve a chance to be helped and restored?

I'd sooner you "restored" that poor woman...my post to sassy was quite typically "swerved"

You think that at this age, they had all the faculties in place to make the correct decision?

you telling me at their age they dont know that basically torturing someone to death is utterly wrong and unacceptable??

I am not excusing their behaviour, I'm saying that what is the alternative? To say "You didn't turn out right, fuck the reason why, so just rot"???

just rot seems reasonable, since thats the ONLY choice left to the victim (literally)....but while they are rotting by all means study them like rats in a lab to attempt to find a "reason"...knowing that may help in the future Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2190311264

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:06 am

Both valid points.

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:07 am

and are you swerving my post to you ?? eddie.....

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:10 am

Lord Foul wrote:and are you swerving my post to you ?? eddie.....

I never ever swerve a direct question IF I SEE IT Victooooor!!!

I will go and look now. Make yourself a cup of rabbit blood tea and wait

by Guest Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:13 am

And your post wasn't swerved Victor, I answered you. Perhaps you are getting too old to read a lot!

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:13 am

Lord Foul wrote:
eddie wrote:So you both, Tommy and Vic, feel that these young people (and let's not forget the fact these young people have lived a shitty existence) don't deserve a chance to be helped and restored?

I'd sooner you "restored" that poor woman...my post to sassy was quite typically "swerved"

You think that at this age, they had all the faculties in place to make the correct decision?

you telling me at their age they dont know that basically torturing someone to death is utterly wrong and unacceptable??

I am not excusing their behaviour, I'm saying that what is the alternative? To say "You didn't turn out right, fuck the reason why, so just rot"???

just rot seems reasonable, since thats the ONLY choice left to the victim (literally)....but while they are rotting by all means study them like rats in a lab to attempt to find a "reason"...knowing that may help in the future

The woman can't be restored so......?

I didn't say they didn't KNOW it was wrong, I said they didn't have their proper faculties - they're too young to be property developed...? Do I need to explain this bit, I will if you don't know what I mean

So you want to study them to see if we can help other people in the future....well why not help them now...? (Your point makes no sense)

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:14 am

Lord Foul wrote:restorative justice

ok lets see you "restore" that poor woamn then sassy....I'll come and watch your "jesus" act....

you swereved this Sassy

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:15 am

Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

and you swerved/missed this eddie

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:19 am

Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

and you swerved/missed this eddie

Nope, not swerved, missed pfffffff

Right well, what is it you want me to say to that? Because I can only give one answer:
I'm not qualified to "fix" them and living in a house isn't a "secure" place

Am I not understanding your point?

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:19 am

eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

just rot seems reasonable, since thats the ONLY choice left to the victim (literally)....but while they are rotting by all means study them like rats in a lab to attempt to find a "reason"...knowing that may help in the future

The woman can't be restored so......?

I didn't say they didn't KNOW it was wrong, I said they didn't have their proper faculties - they're too young to be property developed...? Do I need to explain this bit, I will if you don't know what I mean

So you want to study them to see if we can help other people in the future....well why not help them now...? (Your point makes no sense)

Would you be saying the same if two 14 year old boys had done this to someone...!?

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:20 am

eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
eddie wrote:So you both, Tommy and Vic, feel that these young people (and let's not forget the fact these young people have lived a shitty existence) don't deserve a chance to be helped and restored?

I'd sooner you "restored" that poor woman...my post to sassy was quite typically "swerved"

You think that at this age, they had all the faculties in place to make the correct decision?

you telling me at their age they dont know that basically torturing someone to death is utterly wrong and unacceptable??

I am not excusing their behaviour, I'm saying that what is the alternative? To say "You didn't turn out right, fuck the reason why, so just rot"???

just rot seems reasonable, since thats the ONLY choice left to the victim (literally)....but while they are rotting by all means study them like rats in a lab to attempt to find a "reason"...knowing that may help in the future

The woman can't be restored so......?

and therein lies the problem doesnt it......so you will let em out asap....to do it again.....

I didn't say they didn't KNOW it was wrong, I said they didn't have their proper faculties - they're too young to be property developed...? Do I need to explain this bit, I will if you don't know what I mean

rubbish...how developed do your "faculties " have to be to NOT do something your KNOW is not only wrong, but horribly and heinously so?????
and IF you are trying to make a case for "lack of capacity" then they should be locked up for life in a secure hospital...

So you want to study them to see if we can help other people in the future....well why not help them now...? (Your point makes no sense)

becasue they are "not "help-able"...but studying them may help us to spot similar aberations BEFORE they kill in the future....

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:23 am

eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

and you swerved/missed this eddie

Nope, not swerved, missed pfffffff

Right well, what is it you want me to say to that? Because I can only give one answer:
I'm not qualified to "fix" them and living in a house isn't a "secure" place

Am I not understanding your point?

YOU are in favour of "fixing" them and then inflicting them on society....with no proof positive that they are in fact fixed....and, given the failure rate of such releases....
IF YOU are in so much hurry to see them back on the streets it seems only just that YOU personally should be the one taking the risks.... Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2190311264

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:24 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

just rot seems reasonable, since thats the ONLY choice left to the victim (literally)....but while they are rotting by all means study them like rats in a lab to attempt to find a "reason"...knowing that may help in the future

The woman can't be restored so......?

I didn't say they didn't KNOW it was wrong, I said they didn't have their proper faculties - they're too young to be property developed...? Do I need to explain this bit, I will if you don't know what I mean

So you want to study them to see if we can help other people in the future....well why not help them now...? (Your point makes no sense)

Would you be saying the same if two 14 year old boys had done this to someone...!?

I feel like this question is either dumb or insulting my intelligence?!

Of course I'd be saying the same thing. Wouldn't you?

by veya_victaous Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:25 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Veya... following your line for a sec... Maybe the 'leader' would never have ever actually done anything to anyone without the encouragement of the 'follower'...!?

i doubt it, I think they need to be assessed. but from the limited I know (i have not been following this case) the brutal and premeditated and sustained nature suggest a proper psychopath is involved...
you know... the kill and tortures animals as a kid, grows up to be serial killer type

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:25 am

And eddie...I DID say "POST-release".....

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:27 am

Lord Foul wrote:
eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

and you swerved/missed this eddie

Nope, not swerved, missed pfffffff

Right well, what is it you want me to say to that? Because I can only give one answer:
I'm not qualified to "fix" them and living in a house isn't a "secure" place

Am I not understanding your point?

YOU are in favour of "fixing" them and then inflicting them on society....with no proof positive that they are in fact fixed....and, given the failure rate of such releases....
IF YOU are in so much hurry to see them back on the streets it seems only just that YOU personally should be the one taking the risks....

That's as stupid as me saying if YOU don't want non Englidh-speaking Muslims living here then YOU should be the one to remove them?

Makes no sense and is a bit invalid. Have you had your five a day? Razz

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:36 am

eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
eddie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:ok...you can have them live within your family home for ten years post release......as your PERSONAL responsibility.....

BUT ...if they put a foot wrong ...YOU go down as well......

and you swerved/missed this eddie

Nope, not swerved, missed pfffffff

Right well, what is it you want me to say to that? Because I can only give one answer:
I'm not qualified to "fix" them and living in a house isn't a "secure" place

Am I not understanding your point?

YOU are in favour of "fixing" them and then inflicting them on society....with no proof positive that they are in fact fixed....and, given the failure rate of such releases....
IF YOU are in so much hurry to see them back on the streets it seems only just that YOU personally should be the one taking the risks....

That's as stupid as me saying if YOU don't want non Englidh-speaking Muslims living here then YOU should be the one to remove them?

Makes no sense and is a bit invalid. Have you had your five a day?

AHHH...so you want to inflict hopeless psycho killers on everyone else......but dont want to take responsibility

see the difference is....IF it was legal for me to remove (whoever) AND I had the facility to do so...and I deemed it fair so to do...I Would...

and I'd "own it"

NOW...it would be perfectly possible and legal for you to take these (as you see it) poor unfortunate yougsters, into your home, and I'm sure the law could easily be amended to make you personally responsible...

so the two cases actually are NOT similar...

or lets put it another way....if some psychobabble practitioner in the justice system says they are "fixed" and then they are released on that basis....and then they kill or maim or even attack again then the psychobabble practitioner should hang....

SOME ONE should take "deadful" responsibility for these things....

but no one either does or cares I mean as said ...for the lefty...whats another "victim" as long as they have had their dose of sympathetic "feel good"

by veya_victaous Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:43 am

Lord Foul wrote:

AHHH...so you want to inflict hopeless psycho killers on everyone else......but dont want to take responsibility

see the difference is....IF it was legal for me to remove (whoever) AND I had the facility to do so...and I deemed it fair so to do...I Would...

and I'd "own it"

NOW...it would be perfectly possible and legal for you to take these (as you see it) poor unfortunate yougsters, into your home, and I'm sure the law could easily be amended to make you personally responsible...

so the two cases actually are NOT similar...

or lets put it another way....if some psychobabble practitioner in the justice system says they are "fixed" and then they are released on that basis....and then they kill or maim or even attack again then the psychobabble practitioner should hang....

SOME ONE should take "deadful" responsibility for these things....

but no one either does or cares I mean as said ...for the lefty...whats another "victim" as long as they have had their dose of sympathetic "feel good"

thats not actually true from what i have seen in schools

Lefty Implements an Idea that is very good and all but costs money,
the 'Right Wanker' then comes in a tries to take it away so the rich can pay less tax,
but doesn't want the political flak for taking away a good idea so just underfund it till it fails
Evil or Very Mad

the real issue with the 'lefty' ideas is the cost
with infinte resources they could work
but we don't have infinte resources Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2190311264

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:45 am

The fact that the victim and the two girls were out and about so freely given the disturbed nature of them all shows that the softly softly leftie system that allowed it is already failing...

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:49 am

Vic, I am not qualified am I?

So are you asking me, if I was qualified, would I take them into my own home?
No. Of course not. I wouldn't take any stranger into my home with children in it.

Ask me something that could be valid, whether hypothetical or not.
I'm not afraid of answering the question, the question doesn't make sense.

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:51 am

That's why we have prisons eddie...!!!

lol!

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:52 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

AHHH...so you want to inflict hopeless psycho killers on everyone else......but dont want to take responsibility

see the difference is....IF it was legal for me to remove (whoever) AND I had the facility to do so...and I deemed it fair so to do...I Would...

and I'd "own it"

NOW...it would be perfectly possible and legal for you to take these (as you see it) poor unfortunate yougsters, into your home, and I'm sure the law could easily be amended to make you personally responsible...

so the two cases actually are NOT similar...

or lets put it another way....if some psychobabble practitioner in the justice system says they are "fixed" and then they are released on that basis....and then they kill or maim or even attack again then the psychobabble practitioner should hang....

SOME ONE should take "deadful" responsibility for these things....

but no one either does or cares I mean as said ...for the lefty...whats another "victim" as long as they have had their dose of sympathetic "feel good"

thats not actually true from what i have seen in schools

Lefty Implements an Idea that is very good and all but costs money,
the 'Right Wanker' then comes in a tries to take it away so the rich can pay less tax,
but doesn't want the political flak for taking away a good idea so just underfund it till it fails

the real issue with the 'lefty' ideas is the cost
with infinte resources they could work
but we don't have infinte resources

wrong veya

the lefty govts threw ££££££££'s at the softly softly approach and IT NEVER worked.....

by eddie Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:52 am

Tommy Monk wrote:That's why we have prisons eddie...!!!

Well yes I know Tommy! That's why I'm not getting what vic is getting at.

by Tommy Monk Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:55 am

eddie wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:That's why we have prisons eddie...!!!

Well yes I know Tommy! That's why I'm not getting what vic is getting at.

So what did you mean when you said they should be given a chance and given help etc...?

by Victorismyhero Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:57 am

eddie wrote:Vic, I am not qualified am I?

you wouldnt need to be...they had been fixed havnt they??? or are you saying that in fact there IS a risk...that that fixing doesnt work??

So are you asking me, if I was qualified, would I take them into my own home?
No. Of course not. I wouldn't take any stranger into my home with children in it.

But on the other hand you would send them out there to be a risk to everyone else??

Ask me something that could be valid, whether hypothetical or not.
I'm not afraid of answering the question, the question doesn't make sense.

see this is the point...

you are happy for others to bear the risk of releasing them.....provided that the risk isnt statistically likely to come home to roost in your nest???

you think "society" should bear a risk you are not prepared to take???

how ......"left"......... of you.......

by veya_victaous Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:36 am

Lord Foul wrote:
eddie wrote:Vic, I am not qualified am I?

you wouldnt need to be...they had been fixed havnt they??? or are you saying that in fact there IS a risk...that that fixing doesnt work??

So are you asking me, if I was qualified, would I take them into my own home?
No. Of course not. I wouldn't take any stranger into my home with children in it.

But on the other hand you would send them out there to be a risk to everyone else??

Ask me something that could be valid, whether hypothetical or not.
I'm not afraid of answering the question, the question doesn't make sense.

see this is the point...

you are happy for others to bear the risk of releasing them.....provided that the risk isnt statistically likely to come home to roost in your nest???

you think "society" should bear a risk you are not prepared to take???

how ......"left"......... of you.......

OI

Teenage Girls Found Guilty Of ‘Sustained And Brutal’ Murder Of Alcoholic Angela Wrightson In Her Own Home - Page 2 2113235493

don't call Eddie LEFT she is clearly Ultra Rightwing Razz

by Raggamuffin Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:58 am

I just wonder what the police thought about the request for a lift. There's footage of them being picked up by the police, and it's just as if they'd called a taxi. Didn't the police ask them why they were out so late, what they'd been up to, or why they expected the police to act like chauffeurs? I find it very bizarre really. I bet they felt a bit stupid when they found out they'd just picked up two murderers with no questions asked.

There's not much detail about this whole case, not like in the case of poor Jamie Bulger. The reporting restrictions will probably mean there never will be, and these girls and what they did will be forgotten. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

by Raggamuffin Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:04 am

eddie wrote:Vic, I am not qualified am I?

So are you asking me, if I was qualified, would I take them into my own home?
No. Of course not. I wouldn't take any stranger into my home with children in it.

Ask me something that could be valid, whether hypothetical or not.
I'm not afraid of answering the question, the question doesn't make sense.

Even if they promised to take their shoes off? Surprised

by Miffs2 Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:11 pm

eddie

They should be locked up and punished yes, but they do deserve counselling and another chance after they've been "fixed", surely?

Like Thompson and Venables?

by Raggamuffin Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:16 pm

Miffs2 wrote:

eddie

They should be locked up and punished yes, but they do deserve counselling and another chance after they've been "fixed", surely?
Like Thompson and Venables?

The murder of Jamie Bulger was totally horrific, and I don't think anyone knew what to do with those boys. There was very little to go on as to how to treat children who committed such horrific crimes. There was Mary Bell of course, but it was such a rare event really. Imagine if they'd been a year younger - they would have been deemed too young to stand trial or to commit a crime.

The idea was to try to rehabilitate them without sending them to an adult prison where they might pick up "bad habits" or whatever. Unfortunately, that meant that the sentence was rather lenient in the end.

The other issue was their anonymity. They were told to basically forget their whole life and reinvent themselves at the age of 18. Perhaps not sending them to an adult prison later wasn't actually the best thing for them, or for anyone else.

by Miffs2 Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:23 pm

R

Raggamuffin wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:
Like Thompson and Venables?

The murder of Jamie Bulger was totally horrific, and I don't think anyone knew what to do with those boys. There was very little to go on as to how to treat children who committed such horrific crimes. There was Mary Bell of course, but it was such a rare event really. Imagine if they'd been a year younger - they would have been deemed too young to stand trial or to commit a crime.

The idea was to try to rehabilitate them without sending them to an adult prison where they might pick up "bad habits" or whatever. Unfortunately, that meant that the sentence was rather lenient in the end.

The other issue was their anonymity. They were told to basically forget their whole life and reinvent themselves at the age of 18. Perhaps not sending them to an adult prison later wasn't actually the best thing for them, or for anyone else.

Mary Bell was long before Thompson and Venables though. She was given a new identity and is now a grandmother. T & V and their whole families were relocated and given new identities at the tax payers expense. There times now in Venables case! I don't know about reinventing themselves. The Bulgers always knew where they were. When pissed V would tell people who he was. I still think they were a social experiment undertaken by do gooders with no idea of what the truth of those boys and their intentions were.

by Raggamuffin Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:28 pm

Miffs2 wrote:R
Raggamuffin wrote:

The murder of Jamie Bulger was totally horrific, and I don't think anyone knew what to do with those boys. There was very little to go on as to how to treat children who committed such horrific crimes. There was Mary Bell of course, but it was such a rare event really. Imagine if they'd been a year younger - they would have been deemed too young to stand trial or to commit a crime.

The idea was to try to rehabilitate them without sending them to an adult prison where they might pick up "bad habits" or whatever. Unfortunately, that meant that the sentence was rather lenient in the end.

The other issue was their anonymity. They were told to basically forget their whole life and reinvent themselves at the age of 18. Perhaps not sending them to an adult prison later wasn't actually the best thing for them, or for anyone else.
Mary Bell was long before Thompson and Venables though. She was given a new identity and is now a grandmother. T & V and their whole families were relocated and given new identities at the tax payers expense. There times now in Venables case! I don't know about reinventing themselves. The Bulgers always knew where they were. When pissed V would tell people who he was. I still think they were a social experiment undertaken by do gooders with no idea of what the truth of those boys and their intentions were.

What I mean is that Mary Bell was a young girl, and they weren't sure what to do with her at the time either. Murder by young children is pretty rare really, so they didn't have much to go on when dealing with Thompson and Venables.

They did have to reinvent themselves. When they got out and tried to live a normal life, they had to lie to people and deny who they really were. If they told anyone, they had to be given new identities in case it got out. I think that Venables couldn't deal with that, and he wanted people to know - perhaps he just couldn't live a lie any more.

by Miffs2 Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:31 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:R

Mary Bell was long before Thompson and Venables though. She was given a new identity and is now a grandmother. T & V and their whole families were relocated and given new identities at the tax payers expense. There times now in Venables case! I don't know about reinventing themselves. The Bulgers always knew where they were. When pissed V would tell people who he was. I still think they were a social experiment undertaken by do gooders with no idea of what the truth of those boys and their intentions were.

What I mean is that Mary Bell was a young girl, and they weren't sure what to do with her at the time either. Murder by young children is pretty rare really, so they didn't have much to go on when dealing with Thompson and Venables.

They did have to reinvent themselves. When they got out and tried to live a normal life, they had to lie to people and deny who they really were. If they told anyone, they had to be given new identities in case it got out. I think that Venables couldn't deal with that, and he wanted people to know - perhaps he just couldn't live a lie any more.

Mmmm
I can't comment further. But I will say I would happily execute Venables myself.

by Raggamuffin Fri Apr 08, 2016 12:36 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What I mean is that Mary Bell was a young girl, and they weren't sure what to do with her at the time either. Murder by young children is pretty rare really, so they didn't have much to go on when dealing with Thompson and Venables.

They did have to reinvent themselves. When they got out and tried to live a normal life, they had to lie to people and deny who they really were. If they told anyone, they had to be given new identities in case it got out. I think that Venables couldn't deal with that, and he wanted people to know - perhaps he just couldn't live a lie any more.
Mmmm
I can't comment further. But I will say I would happily execute Venables myself.

I understand your feelings. You're right - it was a kind of experiment and I'm not sure it worked. I don't know what happened to Thompson, but Venables certainly doesn't seem to have fared very well. How could he really? He killed a little kid, and the idea of the rehabilitation was to make him face up to that, but how do you face up to something like that and try to be normal?

Quite frankly, I don't know how Mary Bell lives with herself, or how she could have a child after what she did. No conscience?

by Sponsored content