Pauli Wallnuts wrote:when they killed james bulger they were very young, so some people could say they didnt fully understand their actions, me personally, i dont hold that view, but ok they were given the benefit of the doubt & the key was not thrown away, now i do agree with you sir niall, except in the most extreme cases i think people should have a 2nd chance in life especially if theyv'e served their time, but when theyv'e had that 2nd chance & still piss it away then imo thats it no more chances, &i definatly dont think he should be priviliged enough to keep his anonymity, wouldnt you want to know if he was the next door neigbour of a young family member?
Again Paulli another very good criticism of my view, as i am talking from a removed perspective, would i be so sure if it was personal? It's a hard one to answer.
This is the question that pulls me in two different directions, on one side i think yes it should still be preserved because of the risks to his personal safety. However, as you say, there has to be a limit when we say enough is enough. If we did these though, i'm sure it would be as good as signing his death penalty.
For me, this decision waits on if he is found guilty, if he is, it is hard to see how one can justify giving him another chance?
Although there is another theory to this, if Venables was indeed the one that showed remorse, as reports suggest. Then would be not expect him to be more likely to end up in jail again, as the remose and guilt may play on his mind and deeply effect him? This is just speculation of course, but worth considering imo. Although it is important not to allow this to turn into sympathy which results in us loosing our view on the nature of his previously crime.