Is James Bulger's mother plain stupid or simply mentally ill?
James Bulger's mother calls for staff who monitored Jon Venables to be sacked
James Bulger's mother has called for the probation officers who monitored Jon Venables, one of her son's killers, to be sacked following the outcry after his return to jail.
I can have sympathy for Denise Fergus being a victim in the crime of murder which took her son James Bulger's life away. And, can understand her strong feelings towards her son's killers.
However, she gets no points for allowing herself to be manipulated and exploited by the gutter press intent on increasing newspaper sales on the back of her son's murder.
It is difficult to satisfy what somebody wants when they don't or won't say what they want.
First, Denise Fergus states that she has an agreement with the Ministry of Justice to inform her if and when there is an alleged breach of Jon Venables or Robert Thompson's life licence conditions. The MoJ did inform her of the alleged breach in Jon Venables case. Unless the agreement also included being informed of the nature of the alleged breach, Denise Fergus has no genuine complaint.
Second, that Denise Fergus wants answers and "said the first question would be about why Venables was recalled". This would indicate that those details were not part of the original agreement. And, this appears to be an attempt to blackmail the MoJ into renegotiating the terms of that agreement.
Third, the refusal to state what other questions she would ask indicates she hasn't got any idea because neither the Sun nor Daily Mail have yet given her the list of questions they want answering!
Fourth, Denise Fergus states that Jon Venables should not get another identity because it costs money. And yet she wants him to go into prison which will cost at least £200,000 per year!
Fifth, "I am sick of them closing doors in my face. It's about time they started telling me what I think I should know. As James's mother I have a right to know". This would indicate that Denise Fergus is mentally unbalanced. Either that, or she is just plain stupid. Justice should not pander to the whims of someone being unreasonable. All this does is upset the balance of justice in favour of the unbalanced!
UPDATE: Bulger killer Jon Venables' recall reasons stay secret
In a statement to the House of Commons, Mr Straw said he had given "active thought" about releasing more information but concluded it "would not presently be in the interests of justice".
n.b. Those probation officers monitoring released lifers tend to be changed every 2 years.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
7 comments:
I had to switch her off when I saw her on video on the BBC website,
She still hasn't got over the fact that they were released in the first place.
She is projecting all her hurt feelings at Venables and asking the government to publically slay him in the media despite the rights of the accused. Lawyer and a fair trial, and presumption of innocence.
She is a liability if you ask me and is being used by the media very effectively.
That's bit harsh!
Both the article and the previous comment from Henry.
The press isn't helping her, Anon, it's making it all worse for her. Much worse. And justice has to remain dispassionate in the midst of a hullabaloo. A time like this calls for emotional and intellectual rigour however many newspapers that doesn't sell.
HNL: I didn't even bother to listen and watch. It is bad enough reading the newspaper reports. I fully agree with your third paragraph. They are seeking appeasement, and believe if they shout loud enough they will get it. Doesn't this spoil the child?
This has all the makings of a bullying campaign!
Anonymous: What they are doing is harsh. Why should I treat them gently? I think Henry is spot on. But, thanks for your view anyway.
Charles: I am keeping my head when all about me are losing theirs. I do look with a dispassionate eye, as emotion only clouds the issue. Glad to see you are keeping your head as well as Henry.
She is not stupid or crazy. It is possible that the tabloids are manipulating her to a degree. She raised a valid point when she said that the public has a right to know. It does. After all, taxpayer money is funding the protection and laughable rehabilitation of Jon Venables. Keep in mind that if Robert Thompson, Mary Bell and Maxine Carr have re-offended, this would not necesarily be common knowledge either. However, because Venables has proven to be a loose cannon who simply cannot remain on the straight and narrow, the public at large, including Mrs. Fergus, is demanding answers and they should. If Venables and Thompson can be provided special treatment because they were children, Mrs. Fergus should be afforded even more special treatment because James was a defenceless toddler and she was his mother. Jack Straw and his kangaroo court legal advisers should consider that she has special rights as a victim of crime and they should at least give her a general idea of the charges faced by Venables. Especially since it is crystal clear that he was not recalled for a minor infraction. You have to understand that this has placed her back in 1993 all over again. Blaming and degrading the victim for being a grieving mother who has been ignored by the Justice System is heartless and shows a deep lack of essential humanity. Case closed.
anonymous: "Case closed".
Is that because your mind is closed to opposing arguments? On the one hand there is rational reasoning and on the other irrational rantings for vengence.
In law there is a concept called legitimate expectation. In effect, it's a pair of twos. Higher principles trump this easily without even considering whether the expectation is too high and therefore not legitimate at all.
He may simply have been recalled because he compromised his anonymity and therefore put himself at risk. In other words, imprisoned for his own protection until the mess can be sorted out.
I don't think the public at large is making noises. Just Denise Fergus and the media elements who are only interested in increased newspaper sales. If it wasn't this case it would be Madeleine.
Not meaning to be nasty at all, I am having great difficulty in writing this.
If some cretin hurt Rocky (God forbid) and took him away from you, could you forgive that person? Your life partner? How would you feel if you went down to give him his dinner and he wasn't there? Fuck what these cretins like Henry write. Its very easy to comment on something without any feeling. I do know that if anybody did any harm to any of mine I would effectively curtail their living experience, regardless to any consequence. So speaks a loving father.
Post a Comment