The Criminal Justice System for the U.K

[mountainboo]

With regards to the recent allegations against the monster Venables. Jack Straw is now saying that a trial would only be fair if his real name is not disclosed. I am appalled. First, he serves just 8 years for the murder of that poor little boy James Bulger. Secondly he gets a new identity and probably a new life paid for by the tax payer. Now he is facing the possibility of standing trial under his new name, so that it is fair to him!

The murderer of the Kinsella boy has allegedly been taunting the family from prison on face book!

The Nursery worker who was convicted of running a peadaphile ring was only sentenced to something like 7 years!

There is NO criminal justice system in this country. Prison is more like a holiday camp. It makes me so unbelievably angry. Someone please tell me, what has this country come to!

[lslowry]

i agree, the law is a joke. i hope in the coming elections there is some one i can vote for to see some changes in the law, but i won't hold my breath

[dh001]

I would like to see trial by the standards of the British Crown Courts with USA standards of sentencing.

[wolf63]

All my legal knowledge has been gained through the TV.

I like it in Law and Order when they sentence some dirt bag to 1000 years and must serve 700 before parole can be applied for. The punishment should fit the crime.

[hc4361]

In any trial before jury the accused's criminal record is never disclosed before the jury makes their decision. This ensures the defendant gets a fair trial in respect of the offences he has been brought to court for and not for previous crimes.
If Venables were tried in his real name, this would never be a fair trial opening the way for him to successfully appeal a guilty decision.
Venables was working at minimum wage at the time of his recent arrest, so does not have a life paid for by the taxpayer.
You can walk out of a holiday camp, you can't walk out of prison.

[sara3]

hc is spot on.

and when Venables is found guilty his history will become known to the judge, and taken into consideration prior to sentencing.

I suspect he will be given another whole new identity should he be released again.

[hc4361]

Not surprising that he will get a new id with all the vigilantes baying for his blood.

[dh001]

"the accused's criminal record is never disclosed before the jury"

This is not correct hc.

[humpy07]

It now appears that James Bulger's mum is demanding to be in the public gallery when Venables appears in court again. Whilst I can understand her request, I cannot see for one minute that this case will be public, and will most definitely be 'in camera'.

I imagine that a Jury would not be used in this instance, as there would be too much speculation as to whether the defendant was Venables.

[hc4361]

dh, it is usual for previous convictions not to disclosed before the jury gives it verdict, but the judge can order disclosure in limited circumstances: if the judge rules that the circumstances of the past and present cases are "strikingly similar", if the defendant claims falsely to be of good character, or if they attack the character of a prosecution witness.
Highly unlikely for the accused to do any of those things if they have horrendous histories.

[hc4361]

Venables doesn't necessarily have to go to trial to be kept in prison. If he is in breach of his life licence he can be jailed indefinitely, exactly the same as any other person sentenced to life who has been released.

[dh001]

Hi hc, there are several more circumstances where character evidence is admissible but it certainly is not the case that the jury 'never' hear character evidence.

In fact, propensity evidence is commonly used in 'cut-throat defence' cases alone.

[mountainboo]

Thanks for the responses. HC, while I can understand the logic of Venables name being witheld, it still doesn't feel fair. I still maintain that our prisons are more like holiday camps for violent offenders. Granted, they can't leave when they wish, but they can watch TV, play computer games, listen to music and they receive benefits from the state on a weekly basis. The child killer Myra Hindley led a very privileged life in prison.
Sentencing in this country most certainly does not affect the crimes people commit and the life they lead in prison after sentencing truly reflects "human rights" gone mad I'm afraid. It makes me sick.

[mountainboo]

Sorry, that was mean't to say "most certainly does not reflect the crimes they commit"

[mollykins]

This answer is kind of relevant. Some people live a better lifestyle in prison than they do in the real world. So we need to make it so that living off benefits doesn't make you better off than working or being in prison, which it does presently, for many people.

[milliezoe]

I feel the problem is that we are now governed from Brussells and we have no control of our so called democracy its time we kicked Labour tories and the lib dems out of office and vote for a party that will deal with the problems we have here IE UKIP

[bednobs]

you question ,makes it clear why the name should not be revealed. "the Monster Venables" People cannot automatically be found guilty of something unrelated, regardless of what they have done 20 years ago, which (if the jury were made up of people who feel the same as you) is what would happen.

[sumo19]

mountainboo, have you ever been in prison to confirm your belief that prison's are like holiday camps?

I havn't either, and I don't plan n going. But I've read about them and seen documentries.

And also, 7 years in prison is a very long time.

[ummmm]

Prisons are NOT like holiday camps. It all depends on what crime you have committed. If you go to a cat A prison.....it's a hard, tough life.

[Riss]

I know,its shameful,the whole world must laugh its socks off at our so called legal system.

[dh001]

"And also, 7 years in prison is a very long time".

It is a long time, but not a long enough sentence for the offence as described by the poster.