blog - open air
books
Venables, Politicians and Victims
Maybe I’m wrong, but I believe that it was poor political leadership that allowed the spectacular expression of national rage to get out of control following the murder of James Bulger by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. When they were sentenced to a minimum of ten years in custody by their trial judge the Sun newspaper immediately launched a campaign to have their time to be spent in custody increased. According to Chris Rycroft-Davis, who at the time was a Sun headline writer, the then home secretary Michael Howard would have none of it. “He felt that we were speaking out of turn,” says Rycroft-Davis, “that we were trying to influence the way the courts ran.” When confronted with a petition signed by several hundred thousand Sun readers, Howard caved in and overruled the judge, substituting an extra-judicial 15-year minimum on Venables and Thompson. Howard’s action was a vile self-serving political attack on the judicial process which served neither justice or common sense. Neither did it help the family of James Bulger, who have been treated appallingly by politicians throughout this whole tragic affair. In the aftermath of Jon Venables’ arrest the same pitiable leadership qualities are being demonstrated all over again. Why should James Bulger’s family have had to wait until pressure from the popular press forced the Justice secretary Jack Straw to agree to meet them? Why wasn’t that family the first concern of the Ministry of Justice instead of what the media was saying? And current home secretary Alan Johnson’s performance on various news programmes last week, bumbling and prevaricating was excruciatingly pathetic. Successive governments over the past two decades have proved over and over that they have little genuine interest in the needs of victims of crime and about the same amount of respect for the sensitivities that are necessary in their attitudes towards the families of murder victims. What chance true justice then in their treatment of perpetrators?
March 7th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Having read your recent article regarding the former Jon Venables, i find it hard to understand what you mean by “we all help him”. I have a ten year old daughter who is very aware of her actions and the consequences of them, and so would have the bulger killers been! Why should he get special treatment, hes evil. Do i get special treatment when im struggling to bring up a family in this reccesion. NO!! The system is a joke. I also have a five year old daughter. Im sure you can draw your own conclusions on my fears that such evil is out there in the world, masquerading as decent people. The bible does state an eye for eye, so should you be even reading this? Im all ears.
Darren shepherd.
March 7th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
Dear Darren – I’m so sorry that what I said angered and upset you. I don’t think for a moment that Jon Venables should get “special treatment” – but in a way we, society as a whole, have created this situation, where massive amounts of rage and outrage are being poured at this individual – and nobody in power seems to know what to do about it. And I understand your anger at me for suggesting that “we help” Venables – but it’s either that or accept his and society’s failure. At the time of his and Thompson’s arrest there were lynch mobs who would have summarily hanged them if they could have got them out of the van taking them to court. Perhaps they should have been strung up from lamposts – would it have mattered? I think in hindsight such actions would have grieved a generation. You hint that I too should have been executed – whilst I respect your opinion and don’t necessarily disagree with it – I took what was coming to me, never expecting to be able to live again. I don’t know if that is wrong or right – but its how our system works. If people want it changing they should campaign for change – a referendum would undoubtedly bring back the death penalty. I’m not sure that it would make us feel any happier or safer – and anyway, life sentence prisoners, murderers, are almost three times as likely to take their own lives in prison than any other offender group. Many die of old age or illness in prison – so for a good proportion a death sentence does indeed follow conviction. I would like to say I am sorry again though for upsetting you with what I suggested in the article – I am aware that it is only because of the grace of my society that I am still here.
March 7th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Hi Erwin,
I too read your Guardian article this morning as well as your blog and comments here today. All I would like to say is that ‘Darren’, I can understand why you feel like that but I don’t think the whole ‘people who murder’ and how they are dealt with is black and white. Clearly Jon Venebles has psychiatric issues steming from his childhood and his current mental state will have been building up from within him for a very long time. He is not able to deal with his inner feelings or issues.
This is not the same for everyone that murders. I used to work in a cat B prison among murderers, I worked not as a prison officer, but as a teacher and I felt strongly towards rehabilitation. It was clear to me that many of my ’students’ had no intention of being rehabilitated, but I was glad that some were. I mentored convicted murders who were studying open university degree courses, I listened to how they regretted their actions and wished things had been different. I saw them change from having pent up anger, to after having been on anger management courses feeling regret and sorrow for their victims and families and wanting nothing more but to change and turn around their lives for the better.
All I am saying is that not everyone who murders is beyond help. Each case is individual.
Erwin – I am pleased you are someone who was genuinely rehabiliated and have turned your life around for the better – well done.
March 7th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
to Darren:
Are you proposing a death penalty for a 10 year old?
If you would have read the bible, you would have realised that the New Testament updates some of the controversial statements of the Old book – “…you have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy’, but I say to you, Love your enemies…”
No one is asking you to love John Venables, but giving a chance to a ten-year old would make much more sense than to follow a lynching campaign of the tabloids.
Get back to reading Daily Mail.
March 7th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Erwin, your comments on this situation constitute about the only compassionate note that has been publically struck. Why is it, I wonder, that the politicians and the public seek to be more punitive towards 10 year old children than they would be towards an adult who committed the same crime? Does any normal 10 year old commit murder? I think not. Did anyone stop to ask the question ‘Why?’ about these children’s behaviour? I didn’t read anything in the media at the time that suggested they did. Does anyone stop to wonder what happens to a child who has suffered the trauma of abuse, loss or neglect, or to ask how they turn overnight from a vulnerable child the state has failed to protect into a perpetrator of some terrible crime? Is it any surprise that such a child reaching adulthood finds the growing realisation of what he did (at a time when his capacity to fully understand it was incomplete – witness the question ‘Can they make the baby better?’) so intolerable that he (allegedly) turns to substance abuse to dull that realisation, and to seeking to unburden himself by (allegedly) starting to reveal his identity to others? Denise Fergus (and Ralph Bulger, whose feelings rarely seem to be given airspace in the media) also need far more help to understand why a child might have killed their beloved son than they seem to have been given. They appear only to have been encouraged to condemn, and this will have done nothing to aid their own need for healing. Erwin is right that the political leadership being offered here is pitiable. I just hope that Jack Straw takes some good professional advice, and some time to reflect, before his forthcoming meeting with Denise (and one would like to think Ralph too).
March 8th, 2010 at 12:38 am
I remember the case of Jamie Bulger and the scenes surrounding the trial of the two children. I found it disturbing at the time that hordes of adults were allowed to surround the courts screaming for blood of minors who were too young to comprehend what they had done. What is now astonishing is the way in which the media are conducting a witchhunt on a man who committed a crime as a child. The baying for blood by adults is much the same as the outpouring of grief for Diana…except in this case, Venables is the conduit for peoples anger. Sadly, less for the little boy who was killed, but rather for their own issues in their own lives. If those screaming with anger would take a few minutes to try and understand what drives them to wish the same harm as was inflicted on Jamie Bulger onto another human being, there may be the beginning of some kind of resolution. When a child kills or maims another child, it is society which must look at itself and wonder where it went wrong. There are only victims in violence, despite appearances to the contrary.
Childrens records are supposed to be sealed, and with good reason. It is no surprise that Jon Venables is breaking down and has been for some time, what is surprising, is that the state, having issued new identities and put so much money and care into them, appear to have been unaware of this fact…
I agree, politics appear to have failed everyone involved in this desperately sad situation.
March 9th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
i am a serving prison officer and have worked with all ages of offenders from juvy(15 year olds) to adault offenders.(i use the term offenders as people get upset if you use the term “prisoers”. i have worked in the high security estate which houses the most prolific and dangerous prisoners and i currently work in a training prison.
In all my years in the service i have worked with a handful of offenders who were truely ready to lead purposful lives in society. the reality of the situation is 95% of prisoners are self serving arugant criminals. it takes years for them to even contemplate the damage they have caused through their criminal lives and then they want everyone to stand up and sing their praises and let them out of jail because they have seen the light and they will be model citizens from now on.
I dont know if Jon Venables is housed at the prison i work at nor do i want to know as in my experience of working with high profile prisoners the fame is what they live for in prison.
i dont understand what good would come of Jamie’s parents being furnished with the details of the recall, this is not connected to their case and i dont feel their lives should be re infected with the evil that shrowds this individual.
i think people should understand and accept that some people will never be part of society and should remain in prison. Venables can never lead a normal life no matter how much we would like to believe he could. the media needs to allow the justice system to do its job and tell both sides of the story not just churn out headlines to stimulate reaction.
i am happy you are a success a now lead a fruitful life but dont assume you have all the answers just because you have experienced prison, nobody has the answer least of all Jack Straw but what we must do is urge on the side of caution when releasing violent prisoners and if we have any doubt when they are out on licence we must get them back without fear of attack from the media.
March 9th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
Kev – thank you for being so honest. I absolutely agree with you that nobody has all the answsers, certainly not me. I also know how difficult the work of a prison officer is – although I can’t imagine what it feels like to be in charge of a landing or a wing, populated by hundreds of every conceivable type of offender, when there is just you and a handful of colleagues to maintain order. I also agree completely that letting people out who have caused huge harm to others is tricky – assessing risk has to be one of the most stressful responsibiities for prison staff. I knew someone who presented as a “model prisoner” once – serving two life sentences for murder. Staff liked him, or appeared to, he got the best jobs etc – he got out on his “rec” after 15 years. Ten months later he killed again and then took his own life. Nobody could have seen that coming.
I often criticise our prison system – I try to do it constructively – for I know that most of the people who work in it are good, decent people. And I know that I could not have made the progress I did without the help, support and encouragement of a good few of those that I came into contact with. I had to make the effort too of course – but most of what I experienced on the landings was not conducive to turning out well adjusted, highly motivated potential “good citizens.” Landing life was primitive, the prisoner hierarchy unforgiving. I struggle to give “the system” credit for my “success” now as most of what I encountered was all about survival. That I made it through and further was so much down to good luck. But I know I would not have the constructive life I have now if I hadn’t experienced it and met people in there, staff and prisoners, who made me think differently. That is such a tragedy – that I should end up with a better life after what I was involved in – (details are accesible at other points on this site) – I don’t know if its right or wrong – although in other cases I would always argue that as a civilised society we should strive to get the best out of people while they are in prison. For whatever reason, at present we don’t. The test should be whether they offend again after release – they have to take a good portion of responsibility for their actions – but we have to take some too if we don’t make the prison experience meaningful and constructive – not for the sake of prisoners – but the sake of everyone outside.
Thank you for posting such a thoughtful comment. Good luck.
March 10th, 2010 at 2:58 am
I admit that I am not a regular guardian reader, so I came across u erwin on five live and I thought at last a balanced view. It’s been many yrs since the case hit the headlines and as a results we only remember the red top headings. Once again our mind is made up before we even explore the reasons and due to peer presure we go along with the pitch wilding crowd. There is no excuse 4 What those boys did but we need 2 try and understand why. We are meant to live in a free socity were the law protects the accused and the victim with equal right. On the flip side we have the gutter press who tries to b our moral compose and screams out rage and 2 hell 2 the facts. So that young adult will not receive a fair trial. I
March 10th, 2010 at 9:34 am
Hi Erwin,
not all, but some of the public understand the relationship between politics and the press in regards to high profile cases like this (I use the word ‘press’ to mean a certain part of the press rather than the news media as a whole).
Both have something to gain (or loose) from such situations. If a paper can run for weeks with multi-page spreads that will increase sales, they will.
TV shows can have people involved on their sofas to increase viewers.
Politicians (especially near an election) can potentially increase their parties share of the vote by doing what the majority of people
think should be done.
People, when in a group are not the greatest thinkers and when situations like this happen, it is the group mentality that eventually takes over, lead in part by the press.
There have been many examples in European history where group mentality and the loss of the ides to just say ‘hang on a sec’ have caused the deaths of literally millions of people.
In this case, all the attention could not only have jeopardised any judicial case against Venables, in effect, people – including the press want him to be inside, but are also happy to ruin any chance of that happening. As I said, the group is not so smart.
This is when good leadership comes in, unfortunately we don’t have any. They play the same game as the press albeit for slightly different reasons.
As for the death penalty, I would say this, Lets have a public vote. Everyone that votes in favour goes onto a register of people who can be called to execution duty – no saying no, it is like jury duty.
Executions would not be behind a curtain, said person would be in the room with you, looking at you while you flick the switch. You would see the result of your actions and watch a person die from them.
If anyone can do this then I would say the gap of a few meters between them and the person executed would be symbolic of the difference between them as people.
Venables and this whole situation is being sued to sell papers, gain political mileage and maybe distract people from what else is going on in the world. I would go a little further than Mr Straw, poor Jamie’s parents have no right to know anything about Venables, they are at present being used for said press sales and rating winning interviews.
It is a sad fact that, in reality no one can share in their grief and in a few months most of this will be forgotten. They are for the press just like a battery, when the power (interest) is spent, they will be thrown away and a new topic used.
March 10th, 2010 at 11:31 am
I think most of the points that David has made are correct.
Newspapers are soley a business based purley on selling as many papers as possible and recieving as much advertising revenue as it can. It is not a living careing creature with any sort of morals or Conscience?If it ruins your life or your familys but sells a few more papaers or drums up some more advertising space then its done its job for its owners / share holders (its a business ).I am not saying it doesnt care if it publishes inacurate facts as it does,but not becouse it cares,but becouse people may stop buying it and therefore there Profitibility may slip.
Politicians,Press and Public Apathy?A reciepe for disaster.What more can I say !
As far as Jamies parents go,unfortunatly it will always be a tragedy that I beleive will never leave you.But I do beleive over time you may be able to compartment it,and slowly move on and forward never forgeting but understanding it was a tragedy that will never be fair.I do beleive you should shut the door on the press,as you need friends and confidents around you,not do gooders or the press whos loyalty is to the $.
In my opinion it will not do you any good in trying to find out what Venables has recently done,whats important is trying to move on and not let this past dreadfull business consume your lifes again.I fully understand its easy for me in my armchair to say this, but I am only saying this as I feel involving the press or as we know letting them into your private lives at this vulnerable time is in my oppinion wrong as they are looking for any thing to sell papers or increase readership,they are not your friends or careing confidants.
I beleive Venables was from a broken home with what I beleive had family problems.This raises my concerns about whether the bonds he needed to be built with his family had became strained as he grew older and was he understandably frustrated at his position. Did bad parenting or peer pressure have something to do with his present position he finds himself in?
It is obviouse to me his reabilitation wasnt managed properly by whoever was responsible for his well being .Doctors can only give a snapshot proffesional view of what they see at that moment in time and they bilieved he was going to be ok in society.
What does a man do when faced with Parents who may not love him and a system that does not care.
What are a persons options,do we care ? when faced with increasing understandable frustration how does it come out and who do we blame for a unsucsessfull outcome them or (ourselves maybe) ?
March 10th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
I think what say more about this situation than anything is;
before this morning we had absolutely no fats or information regarding what it is he was alleged to have done.
Earlier today I read he may have told people who he is.
The amount of news generated over what amounts to hearsay and conjecture has been amazing and as said above, says more about the environment created by the press over this issue.
I have even read a piece saying that ‘media reports reported he is alleged to have been recalled in connection with child pornography’.
We have a journalist quoting conjecture from other news articles based on nothing but the same
.
Putting this is another context, lots of people are running around shouting ‘the sky is falling down’ when no actual facts have been released.
As an further example of ‘the group’ a poor guy in Liverpool is living in fear because some idiots have told his neighbours he is Venables. These people should be locked up under the prevention of terrorism act – the poor guy is living in terror, they have by their actions instigated potential acts of violence against the guy.
Jamie’s mother saying the government should tell her what she thinks she should know shows just how deep in a shark pit she it swimming.
In regards to such a story, how many times have the press turned on people in the past? Ask the parents of the little girl abducted in Spain.
At first the articles were sympathetic, going with the public mood towards two parents in a terrible position. However the mood changed when it was found out that they had left their children alone in the apparent (something that was ok to do when I was a child but today is not).
Suddenly they are painted in a very different light, almost as if the child being left alone somehow changes the fact that she has been abducted.
Jamie’s mother needs to be very careful, she could easily go from being a victim to being someone looking for revenge, trying to use the system for her own ends and even, who knows, someone who believes that criminal should not be released or rehabilitated.
Be vary careful what you say, sound bites can change opinion and the only apology she would get would be a few column inches somewhere at the back of a paper saying she was miss-quoted.
March 15th, 2010 at 10:25 pm
This puts us to shame… http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/oct/30/bulger.simonhattenstone
When i hear people shouting about death penalties and locking children, indeed anyone, up for life i am rendered completely speechless. born evil?!.. what on earth are these people talking about? noone is born evil, absolutely noone. they may have control issues, anger issues, learning difficulties….
not the best comparison in the world, however, we used to have the same opinion of gay men, remember? evil, sick, perverted, criminal even.
the only thing we need to ask ourselves when children kill children is what went so catastrophically wrong in the life of that child that it ended in this?
March 15th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
What I would like to know is when is this Government going to start holding the parents of these psychologically damaged children responsible for bringing them up as they do. Please tell me, what rational explanation is there in sending a parent whose child repeatedly bunks off school to prison, yet granting anonymity to a parent whose child commits murder?
March 22nd, 2010 at 2:32 am
Dear James,
I have wondered before, how could I find compassion in my heart for someone who has done terrible things or murdered, and your comments today made me understand something important. “Often the act of murder, whatever the circumstances, is an unconscious means of proving just how awful the individual thinks him or herself to be – and for many, once convicted, execution would be welcomed as a blessing.”
It made me so very sad to read, and also this poor young man Venables feeling he must tell everyone who is and to carry the burden of what he has done. I wish him well.
Kind regards,
Kathy