Comments on: The Jon Venables legal quagmire

By: Welshcakes Limoncello

Welshcakes Limoncello — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 23:18:13 +0000

I think wec are looking at two different issues here: whether Venables should have his identity protected at a new trial and the rights of Jamie’s mother.

I’m afraid I agree with Tom that there is no other way he could get a fair trial. But I agree with you, Ellee, that Jamie’s mother should not have to go through hoops to be kept informed.

By: Ellee

Ellee — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:42:07 +0000

Tom, what I feel is that Venables cannot expect to avoid facing criminal proceedings if the CPS believes there is a case to answer – whatever identity he uses. His criminal background is automatically disclosed to the court if he is convicted, and before he is sentenced. That’s the way our judicial system works, so the full facts have to come out at some stage.
There are huge legal difficulties surrounding this which are quite unprecedented, but the public has to be satisfied that justice is done too.

By: Tom Paine

Tom Paine — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:00:48 +0000

He **will** answer for his actions, under his new identity. As you must perfectly well realise, no justice will be done if his identity is exposed. Why are you, a normally kindly and sensible woman, joining a lynch mob?

By: Ellee

Ellee — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:19:44 +0000

I certainly don’t want to see hanging reintroduced.

Tom, I think it is fair the public was told because of the exceptional circumstances surrounding this case. The public needs to have confidence in the way its justice is administered.

Venables should not use his infamous identity as an excuse to avoid a future trial on the grounds that he will not get a fair trial, he should answer, like anyone else, for his actions.

By: Tom Paine

Tom Paine — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:44:04 +0000

Given how he has been demonised for his vile actions as a 10 year old (for which most legal systems would not have held him accountable at all), there is no way he could get a fair trial under his old name. The real question is why the government allowed it to be known that he has been detained. Ministers are now trying to avoid his trial being prejudiced, but they roused the mob in the first place, presumably in an attempt to harness its ignorance for political ends.

By: CherryPie

CherryPie — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 23:21:24 +0000

The law seems to be bending over backwards to nurture and protect Venables following his release from prison; clearly rehabilitation hasn’t worked.

So now they are trying to cover their own backs.

I believe the British public can be trusted to give Venables a fair hearing, that they can judge the case on the facts alone.

A lot of the British public are prejudiced and biased and wouldn’t be able to remove those thoughts to give a true unbiased verdict on the hearing.

By: Frugal Dougal

Frugal Dougal — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 21:57:02 +0000

Although the death penalty is not something to be thought about lightly, if those two had been executed then this embarassing, atrocious situation would not have arisen now.

By: angela

angela — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 21:17:56 +0000

the UK justice system is a disgrace too many people get away with stuff the Jamie Bulger case i would of hanged or tortured the pair by children, aged from 3-12 know what there doing my 3 year old knows if she is being evil they should of been fully punished from day 1 not given a life of riley, this is one big joke to them they have got away with it, its sick and twisted if that was my child i would hunt them down forever, why should they get a normal life they are sick child killing criminals who knew exactly what they where doing.