Right to Anonymity

on March 6, 2010 in Politics

With Jon Venables, one of Jamie Bulger’s killers, back behind bars there are calls on the government to reveal the details of why he has been recelled.

You may believe that Jamie’s killers didn’t serve a long enough sentence (or should never have been released) but our justice system has determined that they have served the penalty for their crimes so they have the right to go out and live within society. In this case (and several others) this has meant a great deal of expence thanks to the mob-mentality stirred up by the tabloids.

At the moment Venebles has recalled for breaking his licence (there are still strict conditions on his freedom) in Jack Straw’s words “extremely serious allegations” have been made against him, but until it is determined whether these are true or not – probably through a trial, it seems right for his anonymity to remain protected if only to protect the financial investment already made in providing it.

If he is found guilty of further crimes it will no doubt be seen as proof that these types of offenders can’t be rehabilitated, but we have to bear in mind that to our knowledge Robert Thompson is still following the straight and narrow and Mary Bell, who was convicted of a similarly shocking crime at the age of 11 has remained free since 1980 with no allegations of reoffending.

Personally, I belive that the anonymity given to these people should be limited to a ban on reporting, a new name and a new location in this country. It should then be down to the convicted criminal to keep their heads down and not draw attention to themselves (if as rumoured Maxine Carr was given plastic surgery and moved to another country that would be  going too far in my opinion)

6 Responses to “Right to Anonymity”

  1. PC A Wright says:

    Save all this expence (sic) and bring back capital punishment for these terrible people who commit such henious crimes. You can then call ’em what you want and save a load of money and spend it on important thimgs like ‘Duck Houses’!! However in the case of these two (aged 10 and 11 when crimes were committed), did they really know what they were doing, and are they not victims too?

  2. Action For Parents says:

    “did they really know what they were doing, and are they not victims too?”

    Oh aren’t we the understanding type? I don’t think you’d be quite so forgiving had they brutally murdered your 3 year old son, WEIRDO.

  3. PC A Wright says:

    Action for Parents – I’ve merely asked a question, hence the question mark(?) I do not have the detail of these boys offences and therefore am not in a position to express an informed opinion. You however do feel it’s OK to push your inane rants! In answer to your question – Yes, I like to think I am.

  4. Action For Parents says:

    Like I said – WEIRDO.

  5. PC A Wright says:

    Grow up!!

  6. Island Vacations says:

    I composed a few articles just about the corresponding research but you look to experience a little extra about it than I do.

Leave a Reply