In order for Jon Venables to
receive justice, it was essential for him to remain anonymous and to be tried
for any new crime without his identity being revealed. Why do we even know, at
this stage, that he might have re-offended?
It seems to me that the very
release of the information that he is back in prison is itself a criminal act
and not in the public interest. It has increased the likelihood of
his jury knowing who he is, which will then prevent a trial at all, since his
lawyers will rightly argue that he cannot be tried without his previous crime
being known. This is being handled extremely badly.
In any case, it was decided
that this 10-year-old killer should be given a second chance at life - but now
we are reneging on that decision. Of course being in a young offenders prison
will not have been the best rehabilitation anyone could receive, but is regrettably
the only one available.
The press are guilty of
stirring up the potential lynch mob here. We see interviews with Jamie Bulger's
mother, who of course is totally distraught. But I am sorry, she has no more
right to know what is happening than any of us do. If we believe in the
criminal justice system, then its decisions need to be followed through and not
flouted by a blood thirsty press. Yes, justice must be seen to be done, but let
justice be done first. The debate about how we treat a killer who was still at
primary school can come afterwards.
