I feel that I have to comment on the massive furore over the recall to prison of Jon Venables. In 1993, Venables along with Robert Thompson, committed an act of extreme evil when they sadistically tortured and murdered two year old James Bulger, an appalling crime. The images of little James being led away by Venables and Thompson is etched on to the memory of society and it sickens many of us to this day.
His recall has given weight to the arguments made by some, that some people are so evil that they can never be rehabilitated and must be kept locked behind bars for ever, if not simply put to death. But we have to remember that Venables and Thompson were both just 10 when they committed this crime, and we put them on trial as adults. I am the same age as the pair and I can remember seeing on TV the bloodthirsty mobs banging on the prisoner transport vans, and looking back, I shudder.
Back in 1993 we convinced ourselves that Venables and Thompson were wrong, immutably evil, I remember someone saying that they weren’t even human. But the justice system didn’t abandon the pair, it tried to rehabilitate them through intensive psychotherapy, education and the establishing of strict boundaries.
I don’t think that either of the pair were/are evil, they both had bad upbringings, products of broken homes, they were violent, they bunked off school and shoplifted, there were also difficulties with their learning and behaviour at school. Of course that’s not to say broken homes are bad, we all know sometimes there are cases when parents are better off splitting, personally I always hope families stay together, old fashioned off me but thats how my parents raised me.
I remember back in 1993 some of the things that were reported in the press, about rabbits being tied to railway lines, pigeons having their heads sot off with airguns, charity collection boxes pilfered and of fellow pupils being assaulted by the pair. Some of that was possibly exaggerated, but who know.
The Venables and Thompson of 1993 are products of not only their flawed upbringing but the social and economic deprivation, inadequate social service, failed schooling and cultural/spiritual poverty. Basically they were brought up in a moral vacuum.
The judge at the trial, Mr Justice Morland laid the moral responsibility squarely with the parents. He said a public debate about the parenting and family background of Thompson and Venables was required.
“In my judgement, the home background, upbringing, family circumstances, parental behaviour and relationships were needed in the public domain so that informed and worthwhile debate can take place for the public good in the case of grave crimes by young children.”
But I don’t really think we ever had that debate, we swept it all under the carpet, once again, reassuring ourselves that Venables and Thompson were a one-off, something so evil and repulsive that would never and could never be repeated.
We know that isn’t true given what happen with the two so called “devil boys” last year in Edlington, whose brutal attack on two innocent boys mirrored the horror of James Bulgers murder. Their upbringing was similar to Venables and Thompson, although not from a broken home, it was still as toxic and dreadful. I think we as a society need to have that debate about how we are bringing up our children, and we need to really ask ourselves are we giving them the necessary moral toolkit to be come good human beings. Maybe that’s a broad sweeping generalisation, as clearly not all children are like these boys, in fact most are perfectly pleasant. But many will agree with me that there seem to be more and more children on the street causing trouble than when we were that age, I am not a parent so I shouldn’t really be commenting, but its something I do wonder about.
Anyway back to Venables and Thompson who we tried our best to forget about once they were locked away, least we did until 2001, when the time came for the pair to be released.
From what’s available to the public, its clear that the two had for all intents and purposes been rehabilitated, they had come to terms with their crime, admitted responsibility and were extremely remorseful. From the few reports of the parole hearings, the young men that were released in 2001 were very much different people to the 10 year old boys that were locked away in 1993. They had been transformed from literate scallys into well educated young men, ready to become productive members of society. but rehabilitation is a long process, and they will have needed continuing support and monitoring, what they got I don’t know, so I can’t comment.
Either way I think it was the right thing to try and rehabilitate them, one life had been lost in this, if we could save two more than its worth it, these two children were worth saving, and the justice system worked so very hard to turn them from anti-social hooligans who had killed, in to productive members of society, that was an admirable goal, and one that hopefully will be repeated with the Edlington pair.
But I can’t even begin to imagine how hard it was for these two young boys to emerge into the world, at the same time they were released I moved back to Newcastle for University and was living on my own for the first time, for me that was hard, but for them the same time must have been extremely traumatic. Yes they had new identities, yes they benefited from a worldwide injunction against any the publication of any information about them. But they had to live with what they did everyday, to wake up, look in the mirror and see himself, a murderer, a child killer, public enemy number one, he had to go on carrying all that guilt and remorse, the baggage of a corrupted childhood, and the knowledge that no matter what he did, in the eyes of many he could never be redeemed.
That’s true punishment, thinking of some of the bad things I have done in my life fills me with guilt, but it can be nothing compared to what he must have felt every single day. Me I turned to God, he it seems turned to drink and drugs, and spiralled out of control, until finally he crossed the line and was recalled to prison.
They also lost everything about themselves, their background, their family, their accent, even the football team they supported, they had to live a lie every single day just to survive. The stress of living under a new identity must be enormous, for some like Mary Bell, its possible, but clearly for a person so emotionally ’broken’ as Venables, this has not been possible.
This doesn’t mean that rehabilitation doesn’t work, but this is an extremely complex case with a lot of extenuating factors.
The media seem to be salivating at the prospect of revealing the identity of Venables, and society is going along with it. Whatever Venables has done wrong, whatever law he broke, he needs to face a fair and impartial trial. The only way to guarantee a fair trail. for Vebables and any possible victims is if he can face an unbiased jury and they only way that will happen is if he is tired as the 27 year old man he is now, not the 10 year old boy he was. We can have justice , or we can have revenge. We can’t have both.
It is right that that anonymity is to be maintained, the alternative is to hand justice to the lynch mob. And this wouldn’t be justice it would be vengeance, and they are not the same thing.
God Bless
Michael