Prev
Next

Hard time may be the only deterrent for young offenders

Damien Leith

by Damien Leith

09 Jul 05:55am

Must Reads

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses - this is a caption

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

14

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this - this is a caption

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

50

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it? - this is a caption

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

122

Filed under: Crime, Education, Jamie Bulger, Jon Venables, Justice, Lindsay Lohan, Parenting, Youth

100 comments

Last weekend my heart sank as I watched the 60 minutes investigation into the horrific UK murder in 1993 of 2-year-old James Bulger.

Charged with more offences as an adult: Jon Venables / File

The vicious murder of the toddler by Robert Thompson and Jon Venables is regarded as one of the most violent crimes of Britain’s modern history, particularly because the boys who committed it, were themselves only kids at 10 years of age. This story always leaves me deeply saddened and sickened to my stomach every time I hear about it – not just as a father, but as a human being. The fact that two young boys could be so calculated, violent and evil is hard to comprehend.

When you hear about terrible things like this, the last thing you expect is to discover is that they were carried out by children themselves. It’s terrifying. What’s equally hard to comprehend is the sentence they received – 8 years of detention and rehabilitation. Is that a suitable punishment?

At the time, the public were outraged, many claiming the sentence was too lenient and that rehabilitation was a waste of time. “Lock them up and throw away the key”, was the catchcry.  There was further outrage when it was later discovered that the boys won a court battle to receive new identities as soon as they’d turned 18, which was the same time they were allowed back into society.

This year marks the 17th anniversary of little James’s death but the case is far from closed. Last week it was revealed Jon Venables, now 27, has violated parole and faces potential jail time on child pornography charges. This is outrageous and makes a mockery of the whole process.

It makes me question: what was the rehabilitation?

Is there really any such thing as rehabilitation and if so, how can you be 100% certain that it’s effective?

Some claim that irrespective of an individuals up-bringing and personal circumstances, there are those that are innately prone to violence and harm; it’s inherent to who they are. The real question is should the justice system be more strict with youth offenders?

I remember when I was growing up I used to hear people say that it didn’t matter what you did wrong, if you were under the age of 16 you’d never go to jail. Instead, you’d be sent off to a juvenile detention centre. Among the “bad boys” in town, that never frightened them and the thought of time in “juvy” was not enough to deter their actions. Is that still the case now?
I would imagine that there are very few adults out there who could claim that jail time wouldn’t scare them and it makes me wonder should youth have something similar to be frightened about – a fate behind bars – to avoid?

This week The Manly Daily reported a gang of 15 youths dressed in black, wearing caps and beanies invaded and robbed an Elanora Heights IGA store in plain sight of the security cameras. Many laughed directly into them. Clearly those youths aren’t worried about the consequences of their actions. They’re committing crime for kicks without a care in the world. What happens in these cases when police catch the culprits? It would seem that juvenile detention isn’t an effective threat.

We heard earlier this year about the wheelchair bound Canadian who was viciously assaulted by two boys aged 15 and 16, the 15 year old was out on bail at the time and had a history of violence.  What’s going to happen to these two kids now, how long before they’re back on the streets doing similar violent attacks?

Our schools are making headlines too. Ministers regularly state schools are probably the safest places for kids, which I don’t doubt, but we can’t overlook the fact that violent assaults at schools have increased in the past five years. I was shocked recently to read that police in Penrith were investigating an incident where a 9-year-old boy threatened a classmate with a knife. What drives a 9 year old to do something like that?

If kids are starting so young, what does the future hold? In such an environment it’s no wonder parents are criticised for “helicopter parenting” or being overly protective.

Kids are exposed to far too much violence and crime from a young age; on the internet, on handheld games, in movies and even among young celebrities. Lindsay Lohan was sentenced this week to 90 days in jail for repeated violation of her probation; three years too late, since her crimes stem back to arrests in 2007.

The system failed here, she was allowed to re-offend a number of times before finally being punished. What a joke – whatever happened to the saying, “only do the crime if you can do the time”?

As a parent it’s hard not to worry about what our children will be exposed to in the years ahead. Kids are bringing knives to school, not only as a weapon but as protection. I don’t want to one day discover that my kids are worried about their safety, that they feel the need to carry something for protection. I don’t want them to fall into the wrong type of company and end up going down a desperate path.

The message out there should be loud and clear, there will be consequences to your actions. The last thing we want in Australia is a case like Jon Venables – he committed a horrendous crime 17 years ago, was ‘rehabilitated’ and now is up on charges again. It’s a sickening thought.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

Most commented

429Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
333Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
265Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

100 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Steve says:

      06:17am | 09/07/10

      The gap between civilisation and savage, brutal chaos is 36 hours without food or water.  Those who believe that humanity is based on somekind of altuistic nirvana have had a few too many cafe lattes.

      Reply

    • DD Ball says:

      10:11am | 09/07/10

      Steve, that argument is too simplistic. The feriles in our society have been fostered by the community. Not everyone can be raised to be that violent, but it is possible to do to enough to make it bad. The answer does not lie with jailing children, but raising them correctly. The privacy laws don’t help either. Protecting adults who were raised badly doesn’t help. An answer lies with responsibility, which is something some never achieve.

    • Tim says:

      07:22am | 09/07/10

      You failed to mention in your reference to the Manly Daily article that one of the parents found out about the IGA raid and took her 2 sons to the police station. Perhaps we need to look at the role of parents when it comes to prevention and rehabilitation of young people ( I’m sure that the parenting issue has been discussed at length but is still relevant to the topic)

      Reply

    • Freeman says:

      09:43am | 11/07/10

      why is it that some parents fail to teach their kids value’s these days?people often refer to the 50’s as the dark ages but the quality of parenting was obviously better. it’s also hard to argue that the softening of the juvenile justice system in past decades is not partly the reason
      for the increase in child crime. (which some would argue has not happened)

    • Jeremy says:

      08:17am | 09/07/10

      You get that shoving kids in jails increases the crime rates, and turns minor offenders into lifelong serious offenders?

      Of course there should be consequences - but there are other forms of punishment which are more constructive. (And, for the fiscal conservatives, much bloody cheaper.) Jail should be the last resort, if the other options fail.

      Reply

    • Nafe says:

      08:56am | 09/07/10

      Sterilization should be a good punnishment for child multipal offenders. We don’t need them breeding another generation of criminals.

    • Bitten says:

      09:01am | 09/07/10

      Jeremy, the other options are failing. Suspended sentences, community service, juvenile detention, readily granted bail - these aren’t leading to a safer community. The criminals (sorry, we should call them juvenile offenders shouldn’t we, sounds less judgmental) don’t respect the law because civil obedience and social cohesion has no value to them.

      Remember that those who debate on these topics and those who administer justice are generally well-educated, reasonable and intellectual individuals who have an abiding respect for the law and the role that the law plays in a functioning society. Juvenile offenders DO NOT. So you are dealing with a population that does not respect the law and couldn’t care two hoots about how their actions affect you or your family. It is a different mindset. So the arguments that ‘prison time doesn’t result in general deterrence ergo prison time shouldn’t be used’ always falls rather flat for me. The people who break the law aren’t big into cost/benefit analyses of their actions - they just do what they do when they want to do it because that’s what they want to do. There’s very little thought involved. So deterrence isn’t really something juvenile offenders can understand or make use of.

      And let us not forget (much as a variety of apologists would like us to) that the law and responses to breaking the law have two roles: to deter (which we’ve already seen doesn’t work no matter what means you use - juvenile offenders aren’t the brightest sticks in the bush so foresight isn’t high on their list of stuff to have) AND TO PUNISH. Ah, there’s a word we don’t like to hear, the often passed-over element of judicial sentencing - punishment. Yes sad as it is in our PC society, the reason you get to stand up in the court room before a judge is to be punished for breaking the law. For stealing another’s property. For assaulting another. For raping someone. For killing someone, a person’s father or mother or sister or brother or child. Criminal sentencing isn’t always about social policy or participating in a sociology experiment for a bunch of PhD students to research retrospectively. Sometimes it is about punishing this criminal, here and now, for this crime for which they have been found or have pleaded guilty.

      I hope you never have to experience the judicial system as a victim of crime Jeremy. You will be abused and denigrated and forgotten - as a victim, no one wants to hear from you. You’re an annoyance, an inconvenient reminder that

      “hey, this kid we’ve been hearing about with the sad childhood and the promises to be rooly rooly good from now on, well see that guy over there? He’s the one this kid beat to a pulp with a hammer.”

      I have seen it happen so many times. Don’t get me started on victim impact statments - they’re nothing but a toothless mechanism to make the administrators of justice feel good, like they’ve done something about listening to victims. In actual fact, VIS are nothing more than an insult to anyone who has to go through the agony of completing one. It might be read out in court - they don’t care about what you feel though. They’re just ‘going through the motions’. This party is about the offender, not you. And not your family and their grief.

      It is truly disgusting and shameful that there are so many who will speak on the part of the offenders and so few to speak for their victims. Jamie Bulger can’t say anything Jeremy. He’s dead and he’ll always be dead. His killers though? Well they’re still alive.  Would you like them to come and live with you? Is that what they ‘deserve’?

    • watty says:

      10:07am | 09/07/10

      And the SUCCESSFUL “option” is?

    • Tom says:

      10:53am | 09/07/10

      Ah I see Jeremy is upsetting your delusions of the criminal justice system. How dare he.

      Everyone please take a deep breath and look at the facts. I’m not surprised that Mr Leith hasn’t (not sure how being on Australian Idol makes you a criminology expert)

      Crime has been decreasing now for 20 years in this country. You wouldn’t read about it in the paper because it doesn’t sell. Despite what people have written, the rehabilitation approach does work. It leads to lower recidivism and is far cheaper than the ‘throw away the key approach.’ For example look at the success of the White Lion program in the Victorian system (for $10,000 per year per child) and leads to 90% of kids staying out of trouble.

      On the other hand sending a kid to “juvi” costs the taxpayer $150,000 per year and there is a 3/4 chance the kid will be back inside in 2 years.

      I am always appalled when people portray one or two exceptional examples as indicative of the norm. Mr Leith you draw on the Bulger murders, which by your own admission is an extreme example, to justify your own thoughts with basically zero emprical evidence.

      This kind of reasoning only adds to the problem and is especially galling for people who actually know something aboiut juvenile justice. Do some research before spouting off next time.

    • Dark Rider says:

      04:22pm | 10/07/10

      Tom you should take that show on tour or at least offer it to the comedy channel. “Crime has been decreasing now for 20 years in this country”......“the rehabilitation approach does work”. That’s absolutely hilarious. What parallel universe are you living in ?

    • iansand says:

      12:36pm | 11/07/10

      Dark Rider - Where are the statistics that show crime is on the increase?  The stats I have seen show it is declining.

    • Dark Rider says:

      06:21pm | 11/07/10

      Oh, silly me. I thought the streets were more dangerous and burglaries more prevalent now than they were 20 years ago, but obviously you have an academic study to show otherwise. Knowing how most of your contributions to these pages are “studies” or statistics, you might like to take a look at the ABS website. A comparison of 2005 to 2002 for example shows violent crimes on the increase, and things like burglaries on the decrease. Read further though, and it reveals that less people report burglaries to police now as they don’t have any faith in the police doing anything. I have had first hand experience at that, and I ended up tracking the culprit myself after several weeks of inaction and disinterest from the police. Of course, they didn’t even have the courtesy to inform me of the outcome when the matter went to court. Bottom line - police are lazy, courts are weak and out of touch and academics have fooled politicians that the zero tolerance approach doesn’t work, despite eveidence to the contrary.

    • Steve says:

      01:14am | 12/07/10

      Option X……
      The things that change society is programming we only need to look at the Howard government for the results of that. But that aside the common denominator here through out this whole process is education. We as a society have to understand that the long-term gains from such programmes are very beneficial to our social living standards and worth the effort to implement. It is far, far better to spend all those millions on compulsory education standards than to push the envelope on matters that have not produced a positive result from years and years of building monuments.

    • iansand says:

      08:50am | 09/07/10

      If you take the trouble to do some research you will find that about 75% of children who appear before children’s court never reappear.  About 80% (including the 75%) make 2 or fewer appearances.

      So stop being a tabloid rabble rouser and write a factual article.

      Reply

    • Sigfried says:

      11:17am | 09/07/10

      I am slightly quizzical at the fact of which study or accredited paper you are to be quoting with these facts… ? Seems to me like you need to write a factual comment, iansand.

    • iansand says:

      11:55am | 09/07/10

      Read further down the thread, young Siegfried. 

      And why should I be required to provide an accredited study when none of Team Hysteria do?  At the very least the author of the piece should have.  Or he should have rung the Children’s Court to find out if there are any facts to support his inflammatory, inaccurate article.  And if he didn’t the editors of the Punch should have, and spiked this “story”.

    • Freeman says:

      09:13am | 11/07/10

      Iansand.
      so these miracle offenders who never re appear in childrens court. is that because maybe next time they appear in court is as an adult?

    • iansand says:

      12:37pm | 11/07/10

      No Freeman.  They never surface in court again, anywhere.

    • DJ says:

      02:56pm | 12/07/10

      considering that juvenile records are sealed once they turn 18 it’s very difficult to say they never see the inside of a courtroom again, most of them probably do reoffend we just don’t hear about it, the only reason we are hearing about this one is due to the sensationalism of the crime and the re-offending

    • Retired Soldier says:

      08:50am | 09/07/10

      Jeremy says:08:17am | 09/07/10
      Are you serious Jeremy ? What other forms of punishment are there in addition to all that have been trialled and used by a hundred nations ? There comes a time mate when these kids have got to face the consequences of their actions and if prison is the “last resort” then we have reached that point in life. Not all kids will be turned into hardened criminals and if they are stupid enough to do so then so be it. In the meantime we should perhaps also jail the parents of repeat offenders. The do gooders will complain but the rest of the thinking and concerned nation will applaud.

      Reply

    • Lauryn says:

      11:52am | 09/07/10

      Are you serious Retired Solder?? Being willing to put in the hard yards to deal with the cause of the problem and prevent recidivism rather than take a reactionary approach and punish unrelentingly so that society can “feel” safer yet not necessarily be safer, does not make one a ‘do gooder’. I have been involved in programs that specifically offer support to families where they have ‘problem’ children. You know what most of them need? A bit of proper caring direction. Someone to help them get on their feet and give them a hand up. Someone to treat them like CHILDREN. Which is what juvenile offenders are. Additionally, I have personally found that more often than not, the kids that act up and get in trouble at school, are actually the smartest ones in the class, that are bored and no longer find class stimulating enough - so they entertain themselves through misbehaviour.  Forgive me for being presumptuous, but since you refer to yourself as retired, I’m assuming you’ve lived a relatively full life full of the opportunities to learn from others, and learn from your own mistakes. I’m sure at 12 years old, you could hardly have been expected to understand the consequences of doing things that now you look at childish foolishness. I know I did a great many things when I was a child that were dangerous and stupid. I have since had the opportunity to grow up and learn from my mistakes. Treating children like criminals will only turn them into a criminal. Rehabilitation is the only way to help society in the long term. Taking a few outlying, extreme examples of juvenile crime (such as the jamie bulger case) does nothing to help the issue. All it does it bring out the reactionists that demand tougher penalties. Unfortunately, it is not just the very few jon venables and the like that suffer for these reactionist policies. It will also be the more common kid who’s not had the proper guidance and support - most who could become contributing members to a productive society.

    • Teacher says:

      09:05am | 09/07/10

      OK Jeremy -’ you get’ that the goodies in our community are sick of being afraid? What do you suggest? Sitting down & negotiating an outcome with a violent and angry 13 year old with stuff up his nose or pills in his bloodstream? Don’t just criticise - offer a positive outcome. Without discipline in schools, it is almost impossible to affirm values of self-respect & respect for others along with a work ethic. Teachers are expected to fill the gap left by lack of parenting: but we have taken away both the discipline and kindness that teaching can offer these kids. Allow teachers to discipline and reject unacceptable behaviour and the good kids will feel safe & reinforced, knowing that it’s OK to stand up to the bullies. In spite of what our politicians keep stating - schools are not safe havens. They are increasingly dominated by bullies; very few of whom are teachers.

      Reply

    • Rick says:

      09:22am | 09/07/10

      United States of America, don’t go too fast, we’re making our best to catch up with you!

      Yours truly, Australia

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      09:24am | 09/07/10

      I’m sick to death of people blaming movies, TV, the internet and computer games for these problems.

      The problem isn’t the media it’s a lack of parental supervision and monitoring. The problem is parents who think that they should send their kids to school to learn common sense, morals and values. Sure a good primary curriculum will incude these things but it’s really a parent’s job to teach their kids right and wrong.

      Reply

    • mags says:

      10:40am | 09/07/10

      I don’t know which country you live in but to balme parent s for everything is outrageaou. parents these days are there to put up and shut up. All these PC bleeding hearts have taken away a parent’s rights to discipline their children but still blame them when things go wrong. They won’t let schools effecively discipline children either - they might hurt the poor little dears’ feelings. It’s time to get over the new age fad and get back to allowing teachers and parents to be the arbiters of what the children need.  It’s time that children were made to understand that their rights are limited and that bad behaviour will not be tolerated. It’s time the courts started treating young criminals as criminals and not victims. Jail should be so bad that they never want to be there again - they are not.

    • Seano says:

      11:32am | 09/07/10

      @Mags - little more than lame excuses. Something I hear often from lazy parents who don’t want to think or take on the responsibility for parenting their child.

      No one is preventing you from disciplining your children. The laws are their to protect children from abuse and neglect. All that beating a child achieves is to teach the child how to hate. Also it doesn’t teach the child to do the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing, it teaches it how to avoid punishment.

      I very often receive compliments on how well behaved my children are and they reason that they are well behaved is because they have good examples and firm boundaries fairly enforced. I never hit them.

    • DJ says:

      01:18pm | 09/07/10

      Seano there is a major difference between beating the crap out of them and a small tap on their nappy clad bottoms, those don’t actually cause pain just the sound is enough and some kids need it, one tap on the rear then leave the room to avoid going overboard

    • Seano says:

      03:05pm | 09/07/10

      @DJ - you’re smacking kids still in nappies?  Seriously what’s the point, at that age they have no idea what they’re getting smacked for, it’s pointless and stupid. That you have to leave the room to “avoid going overboard” is the scaries thing I think I’ve heard. I really hope you don’t have kids and are just speculating.

      On the issue of corporal punishment, even though I disagree with it completely the claim that you can’t smack your kids is fallacious. No court in the land is going to intervene for a small smack on the bottom or slap on the wrist.

      People who claim to be hamstrung in the disciplining of their children by a PC society are IMO either lazy or stupid and should have kids in the first place.

    • DJ says:

      03:17pm | 09/07/10

      seano your hope is in vain, they are smacked in nappies when they do something dangerous to themselves, the older ones are smaked on the tush or back of the head as a wake up call, also flicking the ear lobe works a treat, hurts like hell and leaves no marks and you can do it where no one can see. I too have extremely well behaved children in public, in home well as they say “we can’t be good all the time”

      I have never had to leave the room to avoid more discipline, that one was just in theory

    • Seano says:

      03:51pm | 09/07/10

      Like I said, smacking kids in nappies is pointless and stupid. I’d rather have kids who do things for the right reason rather than because they are scared.

    • DJ says:

      04:48pm | 09/07/10

      and that is your choice as a parent, I however have chosen a different way, it works for me and my kids, your way works for yours, no way is better, your way wouldn’t work with mine and probably vice versa

    • Seano says:

      07:48pm | 10/07/10

      Yes you’ve chosen your way and you seem to take such joy in it. My way works for any kids.

    • DJ says:

      08:41am | 12/07/10

      @Seano that’s a very broad statement, you way wouldn’t work with my kids, I tried the touchy feely way and it didn’t work so yes I take joy in everything to do with my kids, I hardly need to discipline them any more, the older ones keep the younger ones in line and it makes for a peaceful existence, they keep their rooms spotless or their things get tossed, they do their homework, even the ones not in school have devised their own ‘homework’ that they do with the older ones, they do chores (the ones they can reach) and I don’t punish them for general mischief so tell me how my way is bad when they are perfect little gentlemen and never throw tantrums in public?

    • Seano says:

      02:36pm | 12/07/10

      @DJ - parents who dismiss discipline styles that don’t use violence as “touchy feely”  simply don’t understand a more effective style and have opted for a lazy approach. Someone taking joy in the ways that are the most painful and therefore the most dread by children of disciplining them is sad.

    • DJ says:

      02:44pm | 12/07/10

      @Seano - we will just have to agree to disagree with that approach, as for lazy? I am a single parent to 5 boys I use whatever methods work and according to them I am the bestest mummy eva! so whatever, my way works very well, yours may work for your kids but to change the method of punishment now ouwld only confuse the poor dears, the flick on the ear lobe is a quick pain and leaves almost right away, there is no lasting damage or pain after a few seconds so I don’t rejoice in the pain that I can inflict on them, they don’t get the wooden spoon, they don’t get belted, all I have to do now is raise my eyebrow and they stop doing whatever I don’t like and they fear that more than the ear flick. And you can’t say your way is more effective when there are still shrinks and childrens shrinks still advocating the smack

    • Against the Man says:

      09:26am | 09/07/10

      We live in a soft society that treats the criminals well and punishes the victim. Unless you or your loved one has been a victim of crime it is hard to have any empathy. Keep it simple. You do a crime against society (rape, murder, manslaughter, assault etc) minimum of 25 years in jail with no parole. You are isolated to your cell 23hrs a day with basic food (to save on tax payer monies). That sort of punishment will make anyone think twice about committing a crime and society will be saver. If you are going to be out of jail in a few years where you can get visitors and conjugal visits what stops you from trying to get away with murder?

      Reply

    • Gavin H says:

      10:14am | 09/07/10

      “That sort of punishment will make anyone think twice about committing a crime and society will be saver (sic).”

      Sorry, no it won’t. People have committed capital crimes where the punishment would be death if they were caught. They don’t intend on getting caught. They think they will get away with it, so therefore your 25 year minimum sentence idea will do no more to reduce crime than, well, anything.

    • Lauryn says:

      10:45am | 09/07/10

      That is actually the worst idea possible to stop crime. IAs Gavin said, even capital punishment isn’t a deterrent, but further, once you go putting assault in the same category as murder you’re going to find a lot more murders on your hands. If someone commits rape or assault and the punishment is the same for murder as for assault, or rape you have just removed the only incentive the perpetrator has to not kill the victim. If there’s only one witness, and they are dead, the chance of getting caught is minimised greatly. So how about you think about the consequences of a blanket approach to human actions. You’d think people would have figured out by now, blanket solutions don’t fix anything. Against the man, please think before you subject us to your ineffective, reactionary “solutions”.

    • Against the Man says:

      01:46pm | 09/07/10

      I have lived in Singapore/Malaysia/Taiwan where the crime rate is a fraction of what it is in Australia. Capital punishment is a gift compared to being put in prison and having them throw away the key. Isolation is a great punishment but like I said till you or someone you love is a victim of crime you will never understand. Even if the victim lives, the psychological trauma is not repairable. Pray you never have to understand what a victim feels…...

    • Lauryn says:

      02:39pm | 09/07/10

      Super! So, are you saying we should start legally murdering children now, because Singapore has a low crime rate? Until we have an infallible system, I will never understand how anyone can be an advocate for the death penalty. You are making a huge assumption that I or someone I love has never been a victim of crime… further to that, you are also mistaken in that assumption. My parents migrated from a 3rd world country where poverty is extreme, and instances of violent crime such as murder, rape and kidnapping is high. A close friend was raped and murdered in broad daylight; My aunt had to go into protective custody after witnessing a violent gang crime until the court case could be heard, so please don’t tell me that I don’t have empathy for victims, because that’s just insulting.  I just happen to take the stance that crimes are committed by human beings and that there are a great number of contributing factors as to how a person has ended up in a situation where they commit a crime. Each case should be weighed and judged on it’s own merits and punishment should not only be about retribution, but also what will benefit society in the long term; rehabilitation. To lump all people that commit crimes into the category of violent rapists and murderers is naive and dangerous. Taking away a criminal’s human rights because it makes the victim feel better makes us no better than the criminal.

    • Against the Man says:

      07:44pm | 09/07/10

      I agree crimes are committed by human beings and that there are a great number of contributing factors as to how a person has ended up in a situation where they commit a crime. However I don’t wish to live in a society of senseless crime. The death penalty is one thing, locking someone up is another. I happen to side with the human rights of victims and the other potential victims in society. You may believe in rehabilitation and giving people second chances. I believe human beings have the choice especially in our society to do the right thing and should be punished if they choose to do the wrong thing. How can murder or rape be forgivable in anyway? A life is gone, a life is ruined. If you believe criminals have rights then there should be no jails in this country, once they commit and have been found guilty of a crime they forfeit their rights - human or otherwise.

    • Lauryn says:

      05:32pm | 12/07/10

      “I happen to side with the human rights of victims and the other potential victims in society.” All humans have the same human rights. Rehabilitation is about doing the best we can to ensure the perpetrator does not commit the crime again, so there will be no further potential victims. You cannot imprison someone for a crime they have not yet committed.

      “How can murder or rape be forgivable in anyway?” Ensuring justice by no means involves forgiving someone for an atrocious crime such as rape or murder. How can you equate turning someone from a violent criminal into a productive member of society with forgiveness? They are two completely different things. Further, the courts do not have the ability to ‘forgive’. The courts are designed to be the rational arbiters of the law. To take out the subjective emotions out of the equation and look at not only what is a fair punishment, but also what is in the best interest of society as a whole. Using only what will make a victim feel better is not going to ensure justice is best served. If it were, lynching would be legal. The courts are designed to take the reactionary impulse out of the equation.

      “If you believe criminals have rights then there should be no jails in this country, once they commit and have been found guilty of a crime they forfeit their rights - human or otherwise. ”

      Beyond anything else you have said, this is ultimately why your thinking is flawed. All humans have the same rights, and no man has the legal authority to deny another of his rights. It is a slippery slope to allow people to be denied of rights because the law says something is wrong. Homosexuality and adultery were, once upon a time, punishable by death. I’m not saying that rape or murder should, nor will, ever be considered acceptable, but I am saying that once we accept that some people don’t deserve rights, we open the door to our own being taken away one day too… “first they came for the communists…etc”. Perhaps I’m being idealistic, but I prefer to think that we’ve come further as a society than to forfeit our humanity just because somebody has suspended theirs.

    • Clare says:

      09:37am | 09/07/10

      And how about giving teachers the right to ‘punish’ children again? In schools now, the children know that they can get away with anything WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES. When teachers try to enforce strategies (even things like classroom withdrawal or detention) irate parents will be at the office in seconds demanding that their child be returned to class or let off the detention. We have developed this ludicrous attitude that children should have the rights of adults, without the responsibilities. No wonder these things happen

      Reply

    • Ryan says:

      10:55am | 09/07/10

      @Clare: well I guess you answered your question right there, the people at fault are CLEARLY the parents. The responsibility for raising your child rests ENTIRELY with the parents, the parents just need to be competent.
      Perhaps we could have a qualification program, you attend the program on a one chance basis and the STRICT evaluators decide whether you pass or fail. If you fail.. no baby bonuses for you and a listing on the register for DOHCS to keep a close eye on you.

    • PW says:

      03:53pm | 09/07/10

      Allow teachers to administer legal thrashings of children…..what a fine idea, why didn’t we think of it before. That is sure to turn out well adjusted, authority-respecting young adults. And you’d have to wonder a bit about those who would choose to be teachers and administer these floggings, I’d suggest. There is one science master from high school that I remember well. I will never so long as I live forget the look in his eyes as he caned you.

    • DJ says:

      04:57pm | 09/07/10

      PW - that is ridiculous, she is not suggesting caning or anything violent, parents are gettin irate if their kids get detention or taken from the classroom, no where does it say caning is best

    • Ryan says:

      09:23am | 11/07/10

      @PW: I got the cane at school on many an occasion, I also recieved a bloody good hiding when it was required from my parents. I, like my brother and all of my counterparts at school are well adjusted CONTRIBUTING members of society with respect for the law.
      Clearly your hypothesis is based on nothing more than your opinion and not the real world of results that have been acheived for hundreds of years before one scum bag, pot smoking, hippy generation had the arrogance to claim they know better than hundreds of years of proper parenting.
      The results speak for themselves.

    • Angela says:

      09:50am | 09/07/10

      Sometimes we have to say to ourselves no matter how much we think this a child he is nor never was one. And I agree with Seano, its time everyone took responsibilities for their children’s upbringing.

      This child did have a horrendous upbringing their is no doubt about it, but also the government at the time did not punish him they made out he was the victim this is dead wrong.  Both of those boys knew it was wrong to take that child and do what they did, if the case was that they did not understand this, then sorry but they are Psychopathic and need to be removed from society for life.

      Enough of the nanny state and politically correct behavior they must understand no all can be saved not all care to be and the rest of us deserve protection. Poor little James, the only one who everyone should remember not those that did this.

      Reply

    • AliceC says:

      10:10am | 09/07/10

      The problem with the concept of ‘locking them up and throwing away the key’, is that it costs the taxpayer huge amounts of money, and does not give a chance to those who may only offend once, but become worse criminals by being locked up and learning from others.

      Yes, if you do the crime you deserve a punishment, but we need to rehabiliate offernders, or the cycle continues. For youth, I like the idea of the Operation Flinders, police taking youth out to the bush and turning them into valuable members of society.

      http://www.operationflinders.org.au/

      Reply

    • Lauryn says:

      10:34am | 09/07/10

      Genius idea! Let’s forget about the concept of rehabilitation and just lock all the bad kids up permanently. It doesn’t matter that children really don’t understand the real implication or consequences of their actions. What an adult knows is criminal, a kid will perceive as “naughty”. But that doesn’t matter at all… once a bad kid, always a bad kid. While we’re at it - let’s introduce cops into our schools, like the USA, so that our 10 year old sons can be tasered, and our 13 year old daughters can be strip searched for bringing aspirin to school. Or maybe, if we’re lucky, we get to have our 7 year olds arrested when they bring a butter knife in to school so they can cut their birthday cake that they brought in to share with their class… Because zero tolerance and treating children like adults in the eyes of the law has worked brilliantly everwhere else hasn’t it? Moron.

      Reply

    • Freeman says:

      09:26am | 11/07/10

      umm, that’s not at all what damien said. (moron)
      he did suggest , though, that serious offenders have a stint in gaol.
      at twelve years old you know right from wrong and enough about consequences.

    • Lauryn says:

      04:52pm | 12/07/10

      Ummm ... yes it is. Juvenile detention is jail. It is jail for children - to suggest that children go to an adult prison, is to suggest treating them as an adult. No one is saying that a 12 year old doesn’t understand right and wrong, and yes, a 12 year old will understand consequences, to a degree, but not to the full extent that an adult does. If children could comprehend consequence and analyse situations as well as an adult, then there would be no need for a minimum voting age, minimum age of consent, to get married, to work, or to obtain credit. Serious offenders do get sent to jail. It’s called juvenile detention.

    • Daily Magnet says:

      10:36am | 09/07/10

      This article is a bit shallow, inflammatory and vapid and there are really enough stories like this out in the public domain anyway - what was the point, it’s not like you researched the subject matter?

      For anyone who isn’t aware…the number of kids in for violent offences is virtually nil, compared to the number in there for breaching piddly bail conditions on piddly charges like stealing or standing in the wrong place without an adult present. 

      Apart from that, many of the juvenile detainees in your state are Indigenous and the reson they are in there has more to do with discrimmination(racism) than committing any type of actual criminal offences.

      Trying to present an image of child offenders as vicious sex killers is really shameful and preposterous and you should really stop and question your own thought processes.

      Reply

    • Steven says:

      10:47am | 09/07/10

      You get an island.  Preferably one of the ones off southern Tasmania where it gets pretty cold and windy.  Anyone committing an offence that earns them more than 5 years is dropped on this island. 

      There are no wardens, no buidings.  Survival of the fittest.  There’s a food drop once a week. 

      There are cameras.  It’s reality television at its best and worst.  But all these potential offenders will watch it and all of them will think twice before they do what they’re thinking of doing.

      Anyone who survives their full sentence can come back and be the Minister for Defence.

      Reply

    • Ryan says:

      10:56am | 09/07/10

      @Steven: why have a food drop at all?

    • DJ says:

      11:24am | 09/07/10

      why not just have them sent to military school?

    • James1 says:

      01:41pm | 09/07/10

      DJ, because compared to Steven’s suggestion, watching kids at a military school would be boring.

    • James1 says:

      01:42pm | 09/07/10

      DJ, because compared to Steven’s suggestion, watching kids at a military school would be boring.

    • DJ says:

      03:21pm | 09/07/10

      James1 - I apologise profusely, I wasn’t thinking about viewer entertainment.  Although if you filmed it could be funny kind of like the biggest loser, those fatties are funny with their crying and hating the trainers for their pain and frustrations when they knew what they were signing up for.

      Think about it could be funny, wake these ‘bad ass’ kids at 0500, no video games or mummy coddling, PT, KP, realising they had it really good at home and shouldn’t have pushed the issue

    • James1 says:

      04:07pm | 09/07/10

      You have won me over DJ.  That would indeed provide for some hilarious moments.  I recall a show on ABC doing similar stuff - taking awful teens and making them live in the middle of nowhere on limited toilet paper, and with no cigarettes or alcohol.  Needless to say, shenanigans ensued.

    • Jane says:

      11:17am | 09/07/10

      The case of the murder of James Bulger is an extreme one and should not be used as justification for loocking up young offenders and throwing away the key. In fact this whole article is predicated on an arguement that is backed up by a couple of examples that the author has used to steroetype all young offenders. I also question where the information and statistics he uses come from.

      I totally agree with Daily Magnet - this article is completely inflamatory and does nothing to address the often vexed issue of child offenders.

      Reply

    • Arios says:

      12:01pm | 09/07/10

      Damien I totally agree and there is much to be concerned about (and I love your music by the way).

      The fabric of Australian society is unfortunately rotting more and more by the day. Many parents are not responsible for their children these days as many of them are generational drug users who drag their children up through such unstable environments - they aren’t interested in what their children are up to, they are often too busy stealing to pay the bills and getting high to escape their dismal realities.

      It has reached such astonishing levels where he have the highest levels of petty crime (robbings, bashings, petty theft, cars keyed/scratched etc) in the world. We have thousands upon thousands of bored/dangerous/angry young people flocking the streets in groups and making the general public quite intimidated. It amazes me to observe the difference in facial expressions between the elderly in Australia and the elderly in Japan. The elderly Japanese always smile, always walk out late at night alone, even around midnight, they feel safe in their streets and they feel respected by the younger generation and included. Which is how it should be. This is not the case in Australia - the elderly blockade themselves into their homes after dark in fear of going outside for being mugged for $10.

      The thing I learnt from growing up and seeing various troubled kids who turned much worse later in life was that these kids were far from stupid. They were often quite intelligent, they knew how to play the game and they knew that particular rules or laws didn’t follow with strong punishment. They know that they will often get away with particular crimes and so they laugh and proceed. They communicate with other troubled kids and joke about how soft the laws are and therefore who cares, let’s do it. They basically just want to stick a big middle finger up to society, because they aren’t loved.

      It is clear that our current system of being overly kind just doesn’t work. We bend over backwards for the crims, but the message needs to be much simpler and firmer. Because they aren’t so naive to be unaware of penalties that follow their actions. While ever the general public feel unsafe and intimidated, this has to come as priority number 1 above everything else, including the rehabilitation of the offenders. The public should never feel unsafe/intimated at any cost. Put our common thug type offenders in Singapore and they sure as hell wouldn’t offend because they would have their hands cut off. And what do you know the streets in Singapore are the safest in the world, along with Japan’s - who coincidentally also has the death penalty.

      When will someone stand up and admit that we need to learn something from these countries and do it fast. The longer I live in Tokyo, the more I cringe when reading about the huge levels of violence and anger back home in Australia - it’s really heartbreaking and the problem is very real.

      I’ve always believed in “you must be the change you seek in the world” - I reckon it’s not that far away that the common citizens will revolt and we will see mass riots of ordinary people wanting to protest to get their everyday safety back and toughen the laws right up.

      Japan was alarmed recently because in the past year 72 cars were reported stolen - country wide!!! That many would be stolen in certain Sydney streets alone! Just absolutely amazing how different two places can be.

      Reply

    • JC says:

      03:11pm | 09/07/10

      are you kidding me? the singaporeans are basically robots with no free thought or free will and the Japanese are mostly hermits these days.
      Australia has its problems, but who wants to live like that?

    • Michael says:

      12:30pm | 09/07/10

      Here we go again. OK, deep breath…
      All you people with your radical ideas of punishment and incarceration have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. All these comments that all offenders should be thrown in jail for 25 years minimum with fish carcasses and muddy water as the sole means of sustinance lack any credibility because they are all said by Mr/Mrs/M/s Joe or Jane Bloggs. It is tandamount to me getting on and offering ideas about how best to treat anaphylaxis when I don’t have a Doctor before my name.

      Guaranteed that if people did some research into punitive systems at a university level, then they would hold vastly different opinions. The fact is, we actually have no idea as to what an acceptable sentence is, and here’s a tip: an acceptable sentence is not simply a sentence YOU would like to see imposed. It has to be measured and humane, whether the offenders deserve it or not.

      Reply

    • Tom says:

      12:41pm | 09/07/10

      This is a fantastic idea. Enclosing hundreds of juvenile delinquents together will certainly set them on the straight and narrow.

      Have you thought that if you want to stop juvenile crime, throwing them into a facility with many other criminals, where they can learn the tricks of the trade from like minded individuals, and hence come out as even more hardened criminals, isn’t the best idea?

      This is not to mention the exorbitant cost of building and managing new gaols to house such offenders.

      Reply

    • Dave says:

      01:03pm | 09/07/10

      If this argument were any simpler it’d be written with crayons. If every single child raised on similar media such as violent films, shows and videogames turned out to be criminals there’d be cause for concern. The fact of the matter is we’re talking about individuals, not an entire generation. Individuals will react differently to positive or negative stimulus, you can’t hope to blame the stimulus itself.

      What we’d then be doing is categorising the home-schooled Christian serial killers as a saint and videogame-playing, law-abiding web developer as a criminal. It’s absurd to blame media and upbringing without thought to the individual.

      The point is by simplifying the argument we’re also simplifying the solution. The world is not black and white and acknowledging the plurality of particular situations will bring a positive result for all. Or, send everyone to jail.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      01:14pm | 09/07/10

      Chidren should be treated differently than adults. To do otherwise, vitiates the importance of wisdom and experience. To treat the young as adults, we bring the latter down to the innocence and unrequitedness of youth, and begin to (ironically, of course), excuse the evil that one man or woman may do to another.
      To jail children at all is wrong, because they are different.  Would you jail a fish for the same reason ?

      Reply

    • DJ says:

      03:28pm | 09/07/10

      on the other hand the anti-smacking brigade have the opinion that children are little adults and are able to understand what we want without a small smack, if they can do that then they can understand the difference between right and wrong and what they should and shouldn’t do, they should also be fully aware that their action have consequences.
      Ask Texas how they deal with youth offenders youngest age for the electric chair is 10 (not that I condone this) but if a 10 year old kills his entire family he knew exactly what he was doing. over 6 children are well aware of what is going on around them and can and should be held accountable if they cross that line

    • Michael says:

      04:45pm | 09/07/10

      But Texas is still a few centuries away from Medieval enlightenment. Poor example.

    • DJ says:

      02:51pm | 12/07/10

      Not really a poor example, at least I didn’t compare children to fish, I don’t see the connection

    • Jessica Donovan says:

      01:37pm | 09/07/10

      I think we need to keep in mind the author here. No offense, Damien, but what qualifications do you have to make your opinion public fodder? All you are is a songwriter/singer, no criminology expert, no prison expert nor child psychologist. As for my qualifications, well I’m no expert, but I have studied Criminology and the debate between rehabilitation and not; and what we have to keep in mind here is that each case and each child is different and will respond differently to different treatment.

      There is no one answer at all, but just because one option does not work for some cases, does not mean it does not work at all.

      As for me, I believe that rehabilitation should be given a go at first. Most kids do some stupids things in their youth and then grow out of it; and rehab will work for them. When a kid comes along without hope of rehabilitation, then we move on to prison etc. Once given a second chance and they blow it, no 3rd, 4th or 5th chance is going to change their attitude.

      Robert Thompson and Jon Venables are a small minority in the fact that rehabilitation will probably not work, but we should at least try, which have now done. Venables has blown has second chance at freedom and should be locked up from now on as he has a very low chance at responding positively to rehabilitation at this point. What is disturbing for this case is the sexual nature of both his crimes, all we need now is to iscover he used to torture kittens as a child and we have a psychopath.

      Reply

    • Dave says:

      02:03pm | 09/07/10

      Well put, simply placing a blanket statement about punishing youth ignores the fact every person is different.

      What I think Damien would prefer to say is that prison be made an option for those deemed irreparable before they turn 18.

    • Chris Oliver says:

      03:21pm | 09/07/10

      I despair that anyone should publish such a silly, biased, uninformed article. Cases like Thompson and Venables are exceptionally rare; the only other UK case that comes to mind is the case of Mary Bell, many years before it. James Bulger’s killing was a dreadful thing but the reason we have juvenile courts and an age of criminal responsibility is children of Thompson’s and Venables’ age aren’t able to fully appreciate the wrongness of what they are doing. Both boys in this case have suffered terribly and have spoken of their deep regret and remorse for what they did. To be isolated from family and friends, to have to hide under a new identity is punishment indeed. Thompson and Venables were released early because the therapeutic and reforming value of their treatment in secure children’s homes would have been undone if they had entered the adult prison system, especially perhaps if their identities had become known. Venables’ offence now has been to download child pornography. He may have done that out of curiosity rather than for erotic pleasure and many of us are curious about all sorts of things that aren’t in the best taste, whether it’s rubbernecking at crash sites of going on the bestgore.com website. He may have done that because he has an unfortunate sexual orientation which, so long as he never directly acts on it, may be less damaging and socially disruptive than the behaviour of almost every heterosexual sportsman and quite a few pop stars. It’s even possible that the offspring Damien Leith wants to protect now will grow up to be something society scorns and persecutes - paedophiles (almost everywhere, though definitions vary markedly if you consider legal marriage ages), adulterers (in Saudi Arabia), homosexuals (in Iran) - in which case he and they had better hope there are kinder writers than him pushing for humane treatment.

      Reply

    • PW says:

      03:39pm | 09/07/10

      You put a kid in an institution from the age of 10 to the age of 18 and them wonder why he doesn’t turn out to be a fine, upstanding, well adjusted member of society at 27.

      Reply

    • DJ says:

      05:07pm | 09/07/10

      on the other hand no punishment at all and what does that teach him?

    • iansand says:

      09:16am | 10/07/10

      According to the study to which I have already provided links, possibly quite a lot.

    • DJ says:

      02:54pm | 12/07/10

      yes it teaches them they are gods and don’t need to worry about punishment of any kind

    • Damocles says:

      04:01pm | 09/07/10

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.
      Throw these young criminals into a military style boot camp.
      Break their little rebellious spirits, give them some good old fashioned discipline. Do whatever it takes to make them toe the line of civilized behaviour. Make them responsible members of a law abiding society through making them take responsibility for their actions.

      Reply

    • Gavin H says:

      04:50pm | 09/07/10

      Yes….or just further ignite their rebellion and wonder where we went wrong.

    • Damocles says:

      04:17pm | 10/07/10

      @Gavin H…......Yes…..or do nothing, further feed their selfish, self centred nature and KNOW where we went wrong.

    • Ryan says:

      09:32am | 11/07/10

      @Gavin H: children are only rebellious when they feel like they are able to get away with it. I can promise you that a bit of love and zero capitulation on your boundries will crush any rebellious spirit in a very short time.

    • Emma says:

      04:22pm | 09/07/10

      The length of Jon Venables sentence was actually pretty long given his age.  By the time he was released, he had been locked up in an institution for half his natural life.  I’d hardly say that was being ‘leniant’.  Moreover, it should be noted that the other boy (now man) involved in this - Robert Thompson has not reoffended and we presume to be living a decent life. 

      The issues with this case can mostly be traced to tabloid hysteria, mob rabble rousing and the repugnant vengeful salivating of many.  The tabloids never wanted justice for these two - it was always about vengeance.

      A virtually identical case in England happened in 1861 in Stockport.  Two schoolboys abducted a two year old, walked him around; was seen by adults who didn’t intervene, took him to a secluded spot and battered him to death.  The difference was the public and media reaction which was far more progressive.  The two boys served less than five years in correctional facilities and were released to full, long and productive lives.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/a-child-murdered-by-children-1616746.html

      It is also crudely simplistic to claim that the charges Venables currently faces can be linked to his original crime.  He will face these charges and, if guilty, be sentenced accordingly - as an adult.

      Reply

    • Damocles says:

      03:57pm | 10/07/10

      @ Emma, yes well it’s so nice that the two murdering schoolboys who abducted the 2 year old and smashed his innocent little body and stole his life and tore his parents lives and his families lives and his friends lives apart were able to continue on to lead a full, long and productive lives…........so pleasing, so fair, so right…................SO WRONG!

    • Blossom says:

      11:35am | 10/07/10

      When I was young , many moons ago, I committed , according to the law at the time a crime. I was 12 years old , my father had died when I was 9 years old and my mother couldn’t cope and became an alcoholic. I packed a bag, and ran away from home. I was caught less than 1 kilometer away. Several months later I did it again. This time I ended up in court. I was placed in Minda, and taken to court, I was charged with Exposed to Moral Danger and Neglect, and given a 2 year sentence in a Catholic Convent, completed with barred windows and large walls. It was a living hell and I can honestly say I have never had as much as a speeding ticket since then. While I do not suggest we go back to those times, kids today are allowed to get away with murder, and the end result will be chaos in Australia as these children grow. They need more than a slap on the hand if they are ever to learn.

      Reply

    • ?? says:

      03:00pm | 10/07/10

      pity these crimes were not committed in the usa. pinching something from a dept store will get you 2 years jail as someone i worked with found.. we have a weak count system and even weaker parents that gives these ferrals chance after chance.

      Reply

    • Bubba Ray says:

      07:48pm | 10/07/10

      And everybody knows that the USA is just the safest country on earth, with the very lowest crime rate.

    • NotSue says:

      03:42pm | 11/07/10

      Look at our history of white settlement in this country and the irony that we are still arguing the merits of punishment and rehabilitation will hit home.

      It’s a vexed and somewhat insoluble question, has been for centuries. Any citiizen is entitled to comment, btw. We are a democracy, even if we don’t hold university degrees on the subject, we are still entitled to an opinion. I will also say recommendations by academics, as valuable as they to lawmakers, have been known to change according to current patterns of academic fashion. Let’s look at how English skills are taught in schools as Example #1, shall we? Therefore, please don’t preach to me about the infallibliity of academic thought versus the opinions of “the rabble”. This is largely the problem here.

      As far as the public is concerned on the one hand, justice has to be seen to be done. Those who commit horrendous, heineous crimes against life must be seen to be paying a penalty for the damge they have done, if they are found to be sane at the time the act was committed. The age of the offender and the capcity to understand the consequences of that act being taken into account. These boys that Damien cites were found to be culpable. In no way did their sentences fit the crime, point one. Secondly, once released one of them has re-offended, although not on the same scale. What went wrong between sentencing, and release? Surely the breakdown occurred whilst the boys were incarcerated? The mental health professionals got it wrong! They had not succeeded in treating the root cause of the boy’s aberrant behaviour and he was not ready to be released back into society.  It’s not hard time that is the solution here, it’s correct psychological assessment and treatment whilst doing that time!  The failure belongs the experts within the system and more likely, the lack of funding and will to properly rehablitiate. Get em in. and get em out, cos there’s plenty more where they came from!..  hulks and transportation, anyone?

      Outside of the justice system, it’s social breakdown of moral mores and respect that breeds young offenders. How that problem is solved, is an incredibly tough question. Yes, parents must take responsiblity for their children’s moral education, but kids are capable of completely ignoring parental advice and punishment if they so choose. Schools must also play   their part. Actions must have consquences, with an escalation of meaningful punishment when the rules are broken. It’s meaningful punishment to the kids, that is the problem here..as I believe is Damien’s point.

      Reply

    • Emma says:

      06:58pm | 11/07/10

      Damocles, you are pathetically simplistic.

      No-one is saying that children who commit awful crimes should not be punished.  The fact is, they are children and are more capable of change than adults.  The issue is, should they be simply left to rot forever, or after punishment, should they be given a chance to lead productive and useful lives.  I’m firmly in the second camp - anything else is uncivilised, and frankly barbaric.

      That you can only think in terms of the crime, and not cause, effect and potential rehabilitation merely makes you look rather infantile.

      What happened to James Bulger was horrific.  But the boys who murdered him were not freaks who appeared in a vaccuum.  They were damaged children.  Thompson particularly had an upbringing so horrific that it left him emotionally detatched.  Both parents were alcoholics and he and his siblings were subjected to continuous abuse and neglect.  By the time of the crime, Thompson had been physically and sexually abused, witnessed the worst domestic violence (he watched his father beat his mother so severely on one occasion that it induced a miscarriage), had his house burn down, witnessed serious mental illness in the home and several suicide attempts by his mother and one of his brothers.  Venables was repeatedly hit by his mother who also suffered from alcohol problems and mental illness (including suicide attempts).  He had spent time in foster care and there is clear indication that he was mentally ill as a child (extreme self harming with scissors, headbanging and had some strange behaviour such as hiding underneath desks and rocking backwards and forwards and making strange noises in class).

      Most people who rant and rage about this particular crime have no in depth knowledge of it and can only see two ‘monsters’.  I’d say this says more about the people doing the judging. The ‘monsters’ may well be reflections of themselves.

      Reply

    • Gregg says:

      10:23pm | 11/07/10

      I suppose it could be said the diversity of views here is possibly indicative of the diversity of the problem that our society has and interesting to see a few quite critical of the author for all Damien has done is bring the topic of pre adolescence violence forward for discussion.
      Shame on the critics and get a constructive thought in your heads
      Blossom in a recent post is about the only one that has posted from experience:
      ” When I was young , many moons ago, I committed , according to the law at the time a crime. I was 12 years old , my father had died when I was 9 years old and my mother couldn’t cope and became an alcoholic. I packed a bag, and ran away from home. I was caught less than 1 kilometer away. Several months later I did it again. This time I ended up in court. I was placed in Minda, and taken to court, I was charged with Exposed to Moral Danger and Neglect, and given a 2 year sentence in a Catholic Convent, completed with barred windows and large walls. It was a living hell and I can honestly say I have never had as much as a speeding ticket since then. While I do not suggest we go back to those times, kids today are allowed to get away with murder, and the end result will be chaos in Australia as these children grow. They need more than a slap on the hand if they are ever to learn. “
      And as horrific an experience that must have been for you Blossom, that you have taken it in does not mean there will be the same effect on all but also doesn’t mean some form of custodial sentencing will not have its place either.
      The example Damien gave us was a horrendously violent event and the perpetrators themselves may even have a problem in understanding what it was at the time that made them decide to do it.
      Jessica who has studied criminology posts
      ” As for me, I believe that rehabilitation should be given a go at first. Most kids do some stupids things in their youth and then grow out of it; and rehab will work for them. When a kid comes along without hope of rehabilitation, then we move on to prison etc. “
      Unfortunately Jessica, the killing of that toddler was something more than some stupid thing and sure we have plenty of posters talking of rehab. but what actually is rehabilitation and how will you test the success?
      And how do you know the kid coming along has no hope?
      For those that feel we do not have so much of a problem, if you are 50 or so and can recall your own childhoods and getting up to mischievnous, just how many cases of child gang violence did you have in your neighbourhood?
      . Gang of youths from about 8 -14, about 15-20 in number attacked an off duty police officer and his companion at Coolangatta I remember not too long ago and stands out amongst various incidents you hear reported.
      And then you hear of the many more young adult assault situations and home break ins.
      But I feel to much focus on the outcomes will see the beginnings ignored and whilst family environment and role models can be a major influence, is it possible some people will go off the rails, alcohol or other drugs certainly a possibility of influence there and perhaps the young adult scene is an even bigger problem.
      An interesting parallel is the forever blossoming prevalence of speed cameras, supposedly to monitor road behaviour and the most minor of infingements to now be penalised.
      So if we are going to go to the lengths our policing does to get those bad evil drivers, why not introduce something of a community monitoring program and yes it could be in the form of community services, something that would add value to lives and the community rather than a cost of rehab or prisons.
      Maybe it would even identify problem parents more so than it may be able to be done now.
      But one way or another, there are sure plenty of candidates for that slippery slope to no good in one way or another and we’ll never likely pick up all through participation programs but even if we find some that can be helped in a preventative way, that would be so much better.
      Some of you may say Oh yeah and at what cost!
      Well there are already community type organisations and heaps of social and welfare people funded by governments so it shouldn’t be too difficult or costly to introduce a co-ordinated approach.
      Julia even leaned on the teachers for all the school testing so why not even include in that some personal assessments.

      Reply

    • NotSue says:

      01:55pm | 12/07/10

      An extremely thought ful and interesting post, Gregg. I agree with your conclusion (and that of many of us) that preventing the cause of the violence is paramount. However, there’s the rub. When, such as with these boys, violence, abuse and neglect are generational, combined with the “sanctity” of the home and our perceived parental right to raise our children as we see fit , increased policing of the home environment beyond those anti-abuse laws now in place, seems extremely problematical. A co-ordinated approach between agencies, if it doesn’t already exist, sounds like a good first step. However, short of introducing draconian meaures such as parental aptitude testing before people are allowed to procreate (as if! ), just how we monitor the home environment more closely and ensure that intervention happens in a timely fashion, (and that the interventions are successful and appropriate) must drive social workers and academics nuts! Not to mention the lack of funding and willing staff to undertake such impossible work. I know the burnout rate is already incredibly high for such workers, often because they are unable to remove children from damaging home environments, and the problems that arise when they do.

      I also agree with your statement that the successful rehab of violent criminals must be difficult to assess. However, it’s a judgement that professionals MUST get right, and if any doubt is present, surely erring on the side of caution is the best approach. Mistakes happen, I guess, and some people are probably incorrigible. I don’t envy them their task in deciding who is who.

      As a society, we must be willing to pay the cost of such measures. Sadly, it’s a political hot potato, when tougher sentencing and ‘throwing away the key” has much more appeal to many people.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      05:20pm | 12/07/10

      Criminonligists and Police don’t like to see hard time for young offenders because experience shows they come out worse offenders than they went in.

      If you are going to jail someone - you need to realise it cost the community in the long run - both in terms of economics and the likelihood of becoming victims of a more hardened criminal - so they must be such a terrible threat to the community that its worth it.

      Me, I’d like to see the intervention more at the child protection level. Our society seems content to underfund child protection so we need to decide if we wan’t more money for these services or if we want to have a large criminal population

      Reply

    • Sarah says:

      05:21am | 13/07/10

      Can I just point out that Albert Kirby (the police officer featured in this programme) has always overeached himself with this case.  He has made a fair bit of money from giving interviews and ‘lectures’ about the crime and was always way too close to the family.  He is not an impartial observer but had already tried, judged and condemned the boys before even interviewing them properly. 

      Many of his comments must be taken with a pinch of salt - he and a colleage (Phil Roberts) are not blameless in this case.

      Moreover, his comments about the perceived sexual element to the murder run contrary to the autopsy report which concluded that there was likely no sexual motive (or not, in any case one that could be identified).  There was some suggestion that the foreskin may have been tampered with but this could not be verified and the evidence did not point to any sexual assault on James Bulger taking place.  The injuries to the child were all to his face and head, not to the lower part of the body.

      Robert Thompson did remove the lower garments from the toddler but he said this was because he became distressed at the sight of the blood coming from his mouth and he wanted to cover his face.  This is likely to be true because Jon Venables said that Thompson placed the garments on James’ face (one of the few points where the boys testimonies co-incided).  Indeed, the garments were saturated with blood and found right by the head which indicates that on this at least, they were telling the truth.

      The fact is the evidence is not there to suggest any kind of sexual assault.  This is not to say that it didn’t happen but it indicates that it LIKELY did not happen.

      Reply

    • Rachel says:

      03:29pm | 13/07/10

      Sarah, I too was very surprised at how much Kirby was pushing the sexual element in the programme.  He would not, of course, have been allowed to say these things in the UK and could well have found himself on contempt of court charges (not to mention a potential defamation case).

      Nothing in the crime shows a sexual motive.  It was a frenzied, brutal attack that probably lasted all of 15 minutes.  In addition, many of the ‘facts’ that are continuously spouted about this case (batteries up the anus for example) are fabricated myths that never happened.  I don’t understand why people want this crime to have been worse than it was.  Was what those boys did not bad enough for some people?!

      As for Venables, he has been charged but as with any suspect, remains innocent until proven (or pleads) otherwise.

      It should also be noted that while serious (downloading child pornography), these charges are at the lower end of the scale of these things.  In the UK, a person would generally not be charged with less than 50 photos (although Venables would be, given he is on license).

      Venables was found in posession of 57 pictures downloaded over the course of a year.  As a point of comparison, a British comedian a couple of years ago was caught in posession of thousands and of a more serious nature than the ones Venables was allegedly caught with.  He spent three months in prison.  Venables has already been inside for five months now and people who think he will never see the light of day again are kidding themselves.  He won’t spend more than two years in prison at the most.

      The Bulger family and the two policemen need to stop taking money from the tabloids and the rest of the media.  The press is not and never has been a friend to the family of this dead boy.  They merely serve to exploit and indulge them.

      As for Robert Thompson being in Australia, this is total nonsense.  He is living with a male partner in the North East of England and has always lived there.  The press in the UK have always known exactly where he is and have tailed him continuously.  They have always been rather disappointed that he has managed to lead a pretty blameless and quiet life since his release.

      Reply

    • Katherine says:

      02:06am | 16/07/10

      Those two policemen (Kirby and Roberts) have treated this poor boy’s death as a gravy train.  For years they have been running to the media at every tiny renewal of interest in the case - for cold hard cash.  One would almost be inclined to think they had no real motivation to leave it alone or hope that Thompson and Venables might be rehabilitated.  It has proved a pretty good earner for them.  Their conduct has been unprofessional to say the least.  Their involvement should have ended when the two were convicted - they have no right to make comments on their sentences or their personalities (Roberts is the one who keeps using the terms ‘evil’ and ‘freaks’ despite having no background in child psychology or no knowledge of the boys since they were 11).

    • Emma says:

      06:44pm | 13/07/10

      Robert Thompson has been described as a ‘credit to the system’  he was in for 8 years.  By the time he was released, he was apparently an artistically minded, caring young man who was protective of younger inmates and full of remorse for the heinous crime he committed as a ten year old.

      As long as he continues to behave and stick to his license conditions, he should be left alone now to live his life without fear of vigilante vengeance.  Venables’ new alleged crime has nothing to do with Thompson and he should not be considered ‘guilty by association’ (they have not set eyes on eachother since they were convicted at age 11).

      Reply

    • Emma says:

      02:39am | 20/07/10

      The Albert Kirby money machine:

      http://www.crimespeakers.com/pdfs/akirby.pdf

      If you have to go through his agent to get hold of him, it is pretty clear where his motivations really lie ....

      That anyone could think that man can be said to contribute anything of real value to the ongoing discussion about the case when he regularly uses it to line his own pockets it utterly beyond me.

      Reply

    • Kate says:

      11:59pm | 13/03/12

      I think juvenile offenders deserved some juvenile boot camp to set them straight. Juvenile boot camps can provide the necessary structure to change negative behavior and thinking. They can be effective in addressing juvenile crime.

      Juveniles are important for several reasons. We should do all we can, as early as possible, to help them get back on to the right path.

      Here is a closer look into juvenile boot camp’s effectiveness: http://www.teenbootcamps.org/boot-camps/a-closer-look-into-juvenile-boot-camps-effectiveness.html

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Colgo 25 May 12 10:37PM

Greece makes the final and Ireland gets in on a golden ticket. How awkward and embarrassing. Love it. #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 10:00PM

Every single #eurovision band is roxette #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 09:58PM

The weird thing about #eurovision is you've got this massive collection of dorks in a room and no one is wearing Spock ears #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 25 May 12 09:52PM

Europe has the large hadron collider which is light years ahead of its time and #eurovision, where the eighties never die

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

by Claire Mallinson

14

Eurovision can’t drown out the human rights abuses

Last year, thousands of Azerbaijanis spontaneously took to the streets of Baku shouting and chanting.…

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

by The Punch Team

50

Revenge. It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this

Last month, Katy McCaffrey boarded the Disney Wonder cruiseliner. At some point during the trip, a sneaky…

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

by Tory Maguire

122

Friday dilemma: can school bullies grow out of it?

ClubsNSW is set to introduce a fresh new effort to combat schoolyard intimidation, insisting on a principal’s…

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed