A shocking story!

[jeremyp]

Grieving people don’t need rehab. They need recovery. Different thing.

We don’t know what kinds of recovery programmes she was offered.

Well I think it is a valid use of the word "rehabilitation" to talk about being rehabilitated after an injury. But it's a narrow semantic point, so I won't say any more on the issue.

[Rhiannon]

Well I think it is a valid use of the word "rehabilitation" to talk about being rehabilitated after an injury. But it's a narrow semantic point, so I won't say any more on the issue.

I think you have to put yourself in the position of a victim here. To suggest a victim needs ‘rehabilitation’ is yet another insult to add to injury. However, recovery is a different thing. There’s a notion of blame or wrongdoing in ‘rehab’ that doesn’t exist in the idea of ‘recovery’. I’ve never heard of ‘rehabilitation’ used in association with the grieving process until today.

[Roses]

What has that to doing with them being named?

All murderers should have their names revealed, imo.

[Nearly Sane]

All murderers should have their names revealed, imo.

And to repeat, for what reason?

[Robbie]

They were young children LR. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but the law generally protects the privacy of offenders the age of fifteen. There have been heinous, violent crimes committed by under 15s whose names have never been revealed. Why is it different for those who commit murder? Especially ten year olds for goodness sakes. Those two are not the only ones who have been exposed in the past, I don't think that has happened recently thankfully.

What good has it done any of us to know the original names of, & so much about, these boys? I don't feel any better for it.

[Roses]

And to repeat, for what reason?

Because they are murderers as I have said before. The should face vilification for the rest of their lives, imo. 

[Roses]

They were young children LR. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but the law generally protects the privacy of offenders the age of fifteen. There have been heinous, violent crimes committed by under 15s whose names have never been revealed. Why is it different for those who commit murder? Especially ten year olds for goodness sakes. Those two are not the only ones who have been exposed in the past, I don't think that has happened recently thankfully.

What good has it done any of us to know the original names of, & so much about, these boys? I don't feel any better for it.

I don't care, they are still murderers.

[Rhiannon]

I don't care, they are still murderers.

No, you don't care, do you? This is what your attitude of 'lifelong vilification' leads to.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2186431/Father-killed-hate-mob-wrongly-accused-James-Bulger-child-killer-Robert-Thompson.html

[Nearly Sane]

Because they are murderers as I have said before. The should face vilification for the rest of their lives, imo.

Saying that murdered should be named because they are murder Wes is just circular logic, it's not a reason.

If continually vilifying people was to lead to a n increase in violence overall, would you still support it?

[Nearly Sane]

No, you don't care, do you? This is what your attitude of 'lifelong vilification' leads to.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2186431/Father-killed-hate-mob-wrongly-accused-James-Bulger-child-killer-Robert-Thompson.html

Arguably that people can be wrongly accused of being someone would be less likely if people were known - but the point that 'vilification' effectively amounts to a form of persecution is valid.

[Rhiannon]

Arguably that people can be wrongly accused of being someone would be less likely if people were known - but the point that 'vilification' effectively amounts to a form of persecution is valid.

If the identities were known it would mean that a) innocent people with the same names would be subject to persecution and b) Venables and Thompson would probably be killed at some point.

[Roses]

If the identities were known it would mean that a) innocent people with the same names would be subject to persecution and b) Venables and Thompson would probably be killed at some point.

But you could say that about an adult murderer.

[Rhiannon]

But you could say that about an adult murderer.

You are the one supporting the vilification of children.

What do you think about the man who was hounded into suicide?

[Roses]

So are you saying that no one convicted of a terrible crime should have their name revealed?

[Robbie]

How I see it is that children must be protected, even children who do something terrible.

At the risk of repetition it does none of us any good to know so much & the way the story is brought back in its entirety into the public gaze every so often helps no-one.

[Roses]

How I see it is that children must be protected, even children who do something terrible.

At the risk of repetition it does none of us any good to know so much & the way the story is brought back in its entirety into the public gaze every so often helps no-one.

You see it your way, I see it mine. I have no more to say on this topic.

[Rhiannon]

So are you saying that no one convicted of a terrible crime should have their name revealed?

Non sequitur.

We are taking about children. Not long after the case happened I had dinner with someone who had connections to someone directly involved in the case. Apparently the way that some things were done was very childish, as you would expect, but others were very adult. There is only one way that young children know how to abuse like an adult does. Think about it.

[Rhiannon]

How I see it is that children must be protected, even children who do something terrible.

At the risk of repetition it does none of us any good to know so much & the way the story is brought back in its entirety into the public gaze every so often helps no-one.

I came onto this thread saying that I didn't get why someone would want to discuss something so horrific, and I still don't. But the way that this thread has gone does show that it is necessary to talk about how these cases are handled in the hope of putting an end to the lynch mob mentality that too many people hold. Such an attitude doesn't prevent sex crime, nor does it keep children safe.

[Gordon]

My take, for what it is worth, is that it is important for the general public to know that criminal activity in which children are compromised or harmed is properly investigated and that any offenders are dealt with, that those directly affected are suitably involved and that there are arrangements to deal with any reasonable concerns expressed by members of the public.

However, I can't see that there is any benefit at all in sensationalist voyeurism. I think that type of coverage, in such circumstances, cheapens all of us and achieves nothing.

[Rhiannon]

My take, for what it is worth, is that it is important for the general public to know that criminal activity in which children are compromised or harmed is properly investigated and that any offenders are dealt with, that those directly affected are suitably involved and that there are arrangements to deal with any reasonable concerns expressed by members of the public.

However, I can't see that there is any benefit at all in sensationalist voyeurism. I think that type of coverage, in such circumstances, cheapens all of us and achieves nothing.

Agreed.

[Nearly Sane]

My take, for what it is worth, is that it is important for the general public to know that criminal activity in which children are compromised or harmed is properly investigated and that any offenders are dealt with, that those directly affected are suitably involved and that there are arrangements to deal with any reasonable concerns expressed by members of the public.

However, I can't see that there is any benefit at all in sensationalist voyeurism. I think that type of coverage, in such circumstances, cheapens all of us and achieves nothing.

Not the benefit of lifelong vilification which was cited.

[Robbie]

Yes. Strikes me there are people who get some satisfaction out of being outraged, makes them feel better about themselves. They rise up in superiority.

[SteveH]

All murderers should have their names revealed, imo.

Thank heavens you're not in charge of the criminal justice system.

[Roses]

Thank heavens you're not in charge of the criminal justice system.

Why should people convicted of terrible crimes not have their names revealed?

[Shaker]

Why should people convicted of terrible crimes not have their names revealed?

Because we don't live in Dodge City c. 1880 and are meant to live by the rule of law and not vigilante justice. If entirely innocent people can be hounded to their deaths, those who have been tried, convicted and have served their time can be attacked too.