2 Bloody Years!

[Mickymoody]

There is a lot that we, the public don't know. And should probably never need to know. We might have met him in the street, we might have talked to him on the web, does that make him a bad person? He did the crime, he served his sentance, he had a new identity. He commits a new crime because he has been locked away from society, as he can't integrate, as his youth has been taken away from him.

How would you feel if you were hiding a secret about your entire life? Raoul Moat shot himself.

He was sentenced to what the judge was allowed to sentence him to. He did his time inside, as any convict would. You get more time inside for stealing money, than murder, as the Ronnie Biggs fiasco proved. So the whole judicial system is messed up.

What, if a member on here is him? Do you talk to everyone the same? A crime and you did the sentance, does that stigmatise someone? No, they just want to get on with their lives. If part of that rehab means you lost your childhood, would that not affect you?

I'm sure that there are people that have been in prison that are now posting here, but aren't stigmatised for being in prison, as they done the crime, and they done the time. So why go on and on about this kid?

 

[yaleguy3]

..Because he is evil.

One size fits all doesn't work in this case and the result of his reoffending isn't simply someone coming home and finding their telly has gone walkies.

 

[Johnmelad502]

He commits a new crime because he has been locked away from society, as he can't integrate, as his youth has been taken away from him.

Wow, you are also a criminal psychologist?

How about if he had been kept in jail for his entire pathetic life, he would not have had the chance to re offend in the way he did.

If it was not for woolly thinking liberals like yourself who seem to live in a world of their own, he might still be locked up.

 

[wreckedit]

Quite rightly there's a lot of heat on this subject. I just hope that if you want the changes you want, you fire off these comments to your MP or the PM.
This is a new government and will be eager to listen to you. Pressurise them now until they submit. Do it now!

 

[Blasphemous]

He did the crime, he served his sentance, he had a new identity. He commits a new crime because he has been locked away from society, as he can't integrate, as his youth has been taken away from him.

NO! I'll let the 'He commits a new crime because he has been locked away from society', shyte slide but he committed the original heinous crime and was 'out on licence' (which should NEVER have happened). Once he committed the second crime that should have been it, back to jail never to be released again because he obviously couldn't be trusted (which we've learned TIME and TIME again!!!!!). This 'new' identity won't hide him inside. Prison Officers have loose tongues! He's on borrowed time.... tick tock, tick tock...

This is a new government and will be eager to listen to you.

Dreamer!

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

There's a bit more to it than doing the crime and doing the time, things like remorse.
Sure we do not know if Venables has shown remorse, as he has not been able to interact with the common people in that form.
But his actions since being released on license have not shown him in a good light, therefore in my view he has not shown remorse or any feeling of guilt towards the evil crime he committed against James Bulger, that poor lad died in a horrendous way, why does Venables deserve any compassion, he should be made to complete his original sentence plus the two years added on, for starters.
He is plain evil and there is something that tells me that he never will be a normal law abiding citizen, so best kept under lock and key or shot!

 

[Blasphemous]

there is something that tells me that he never will be a normal law abiding citizen, so best kept under lock and key or shot!

The 'something' Prentice is the fact that he continually breaks the law.

Now there's 'breaking the law' and there's 'breaking the law'. There are those that set out to break the law and there are those that break the law because of those that have set out to break the law. Tony Martin killed a burglar. So Tony Martin 'broke the law' but as we've all said before, if the scum of the earth burglar hadn't been in Tony Martin's home he wouldn't have been killed. Simple!

It's a little off topic but I just want to show the inconsistency and absurdity of the Parole system. When Tony Martin became eligible for parole and early release in January 2003, the Parole Board rejected his application without stating a reason. The chairman of the parole board, Sir David Hatch, in an interview with The Times described Martin as "a very dangerous man" who may still believe his action had been right (yeah like the rest of right thinking people in society!!!!). Martin challenged the decision in the High Court, where the parole board's decision was upheld. Probation officers on Martin's cases said there was an "unacceptable risk" that Martin might again react with excessive force if other would-be burglars intruded on his Norfolk farm. AND your point is???? That's the problem with the law and the Parole system, it favours criminals. Tony Martin in MANY peoples opinion was NOT, IS NOT a criminal. He was and old man living on his own minding his own business when two CRIMINALS entered his property in the dead of night. How scared must he have been? And because he wouldn't say he was remorseful and or sorry for taking the action that he did, the Parole Board decided he was still a risk to.... 'would-be burglars intruding on his Norfolk farm.' Well if that's not the biggest piece of shyte I've EVER read I don't know what is.

 

[joinerjohn]

I knew a social worker who worked at a secure childrens unit when this scumbag was brought there. He was quick to boast and brag about what he had done, knowing that he'd be protected. The social worker thought that he showed no remorse for what he had done then, and I think his behaviour upon release has shown that he doesn't care one jot about what he did.
The cheapest solution IMHO is a bullet.

 

[securespark]

The should have remove the privilege the evil git was given, as he has abused it.
Remove his false ID!

I'd remove more than that if I got my hands on the c***!!!!!!!!!!!!

And that would make you the same as him: a criminal.

 

[Blasphemous]

The should have remove the privilege the evil git was given, as he has abused it.
Remove his false ID!

I'd remove more than that if I got my hands on the c***!!!!!!!!!!!!

And that would make you the same as him: a criminal.

It might make me a criminal but it would NOT make me anywhere near 'the same as him'.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

Blas, I'm with you on the Martin case, just can't believe that the jurors decided to go with murder rather than manslaughter, when it was pitch black when Martin shot, then one of thieving bastards, had the cheek to try and claim for compo on loss of earnings.

 

[joinerjohn]

Blas, I'm with you on the Martin case, just can't believe that the jurors decided to go with murder rather than manslaughter, when it was pitch black when Martin shot, then one of thieving b*****d, had the cheek to try and claim for compo on loss of earnings.

Yep , it must be hard to break into houses when you use a walking stick/wheelchair to get about.
The compo case should have been thrown out,,, but,,, we should really blame the hospital chasing lawyer brigade that take these sort of cases on.
I could just imagine the conversation between this career criminal and his lawyer...
" Well since I was shot, I'm not so good at breaking and entering, what with me gammy leg an' all,,, and my nerves are shot,, not knowing if some old bloke has a shotgun when I break in."

" Well of course,,,, I'll take you on and we'll claim loss of earnings eh." "Should be good for a few hundred thousand,, and of course, there's no win no fee you know. """

 

[conny]

If you can't say or won't say, then why bring it up in the first place?
the only reason is to make yourself seem more important.. it's the equivalent of chanting "I know something you don't know..." on the playground..

Col, you are one of the people on here who I have respect for yet it puzzles me that you reply with a comment like this.
I don't mind, thats your right.
However, if you read it in context with what I was saying about the press you may understand what I was getting at.

In simple terms I was trying to say that the press were, in a roundabout way, trying to say this was inevitable given the circumstances in which they grew up. Police investigations into this area of their living conditons disproved these 'theories'.
I'm not 'bragging' or acting like a school kid. I'm trying to shed some light on something from the view of someone who was involved in this case. Most officers involved in the 'core' of the case have restrictions placed on them not to talk about certain parts, and I'm damm sure I did not get to know any of that information. But what I did get to know is probably common knowledge to a lot of folk in this area and entirely different from the 'sensationalisation' printed in the press.

 

[Norcon]

In Ireland you can now shoot an intruder/burglar dead in your own home and sleep easy knowing the law will be on your side.
Just as it should be.

There was a case a few years back involving a farmer which was similar to the Martin case and prosecuters tried to bring a manslaughter case against him.
He could have served six years had they been successful.
The judge threw the case out and he walked a free man.

New legislation was recently introduced in Ireland which leaves it extremely difficult for a home owner to end up in court if he shoots or harms a burglar.
That sends out the right message.

 

[Blasphemous]

New legislation was recently introduced in Ireland which leaves it extremely difficult for a home owner to end up in court if he shoots or harms a burglar.
That sends out the right message.