Jamie Bulger would of been 21 today . - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Jamie Bulger would of been 21 today .

shopstilldrops Avatar
5y, 8m agoPosted 5 years, 8 months ago
Cant believe he would of been 21 , poor little thing was only 3 when them monsters brutally murdered him !!
Thoughts go out to his family .
shopstilldrops Avatar
5y, 8m agoPosted 5 years, 8 months ago
Options

All Comments

(73) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
3 Likes #1
I suspect 21 years after his birth has little relevance; every minute of every day must be a constant reminder to them.

BFN,

fp.
#2
fanpages
I suspect 21 years after his birth has little relevance; every minute of every day must be a constant reminder to them.

BFN,

fp.



Yeh i know , just sad that he should be celebrating a milestone in his life and cant believe how quick it has gone ........i suppose because i can remember it like yesterday :(
#3
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing
2 Likes #4
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing

The judge and the law thought differently.
#5
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing



oO.............i know your only kidding , right ?

Stick to your sexual innuendos i think numpt :p



In b4 Deek agrees :D

Edited By: shopstilldrops on Mar 16, 2011 14:32
banned 2 Likes #6
joeymcjoe
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing

The judge and the law thought differently.

Did they....why didn't the piunishment fit the crime then....they were out in just a few short years and never served any time in an actual prison.
3 Likes #7
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing

oO WTF??
banned 1 Like #8
souljacker
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing
oO WTF??

He's just throwing the bone into the arena for the thickos to chew on again without realising he is taking the Pee.
#9
Well there is arguments for both sides. I'm not saying what they did was right (it wasn't) but it must have been incredibly hard for them to prove about whether the boys knew what they were doing.

In b4 the parents who want to slew me for my opinions. But I'm just saying that if I think back to when I was a 10 year old did I do stupid things and not realise the consequences etc, yeah of course, I just think there can be a wild debate in this topic
banned#10
slamdunkin
joeymcjoe
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing

The judge and the law thought differently.

Did they....why didn't the piunishment fit the crime then....they were out in just a few short years and never served any time in an actual prison.

A lot of adults are out of prison for killing in less time than they served
#11
I'm kinda with the Numpty on this one...but am not getting into a debate..

RIP little boy x
#12
shopstilldrops
numptyj
They were only children they didn't know what they were doing




oO.............i know your only kidding , right ?

Stick to your sexual innuendos i think numpt :p



In b4 Deek agrees :D


I agree. Oops, too late ;)

He even managed to squeeze one in (:|) in an Apple thread http://www.hotukdeals.com/misc/ideas-what-get-from-apple/899719oO

Forget it, it's gone. I thought it was funny anyway, numpty obviously didn't :|


Edited By: deek72 on Mar 16, 2011 14:57: .
4 Likes #13
they were evil and still are
they were relocated to outer liverpool lol
they never showed remose
i know people who work with them and they all say they will offened again
13 Likes #14
No way numpty you do suprise me !!!!
My daughter is ten and yes granted may do ' do stupid things and not realise the consequences' as you put it , ......like leaving a tap running, leaving hair straightners on , leaving the fridge door open, .....but murdering a three year old boy and so brutally is on a total different league , they knew exactly what they were doing , little **** !!!!!
8 Likes #15
A 10 year old knows right from wrong.
2 Likes #16
Mellow Yellow
A 10 year old knows right from wrong.



Too right they do !
My daughter is ten (11 next week ) and is going to high school in September , so is a kid off to high school 'normal' if they dont know right from wrong ...........NO , especially with something to this extreme !
#17
shopstilldrops
No way numpty you do suprise me !!!!
My daughter is ten and yes granted may do ' do stupid things and not realise the consequences' as you put it , ......like leaving a tap running, leaving hair straightners on , leaving the fridge door open, .....but murdering a three year old boy and so brutally is on a total different league , they knew exactly what they were doing , little **** !!!!!


just got a differing opinion.

When I was young I used to break things quite a lot, toys etc, I knew what I was doing but it was never malicious intent to break the toys, it was more experimental, what if I pull the head off this action man etc
I think this story can kind of be linked into that idea, the boys most likely knew they were doing something wrong by taking Jamie and by hurting him but whos to say it was always with a malicious intent or that they knew 100% from the outset they would kill him, things can get out of hand and in this case it did.

sorry if I dont conform to the usual opinions but that's what makes a debate!
5 Likes #18
They weren't right in the head then and aren't now going by recent events. Should never have been released IMO.
#19
Even i knew way before i was 10 years old not to drop a baby, and their actions tells otherwise

CCTV evidence from the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle taken on 12 February 1993 showed Thompson and Venables casually observing children, apparently selecting a target. The boys were playing truant from school, which they did regularly.[5] Throughout the day, Thompson and Venables were seen stealing various items including sweets, a troll doll, some batteries and a can of blue paint,[6] some of which were found at the murder scene. It was later revealed by one of the boys that they were planning to find a child to abduct, lead him to the busy road alongside the mall, and push him into the path of oncoming traffic.
James Bulger being abducted by Thompson (above Bulger) and Venables (holding Bulger's hand) in an image recorded on shopping centre CCTV.
The boys took Bulger on a 2.5-mile (4.0 km) walk across Liverpool, leading him to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal where he was dropped on his head and suffered injuries to his face. The boys joked about pushing Bulger into the canal. During the walk across Liverpool, the boys were seen by 38 people.Bulger had a bump on his forehead and was crying, but most bystanders did nothing to intervene, assuming that he was a younger brother.Two people challenged the older boys, but they claimed that Bulger was a younger brother or that he was lost and they were taking him to the local police station. At one point, the boys took Bulger into a pet shop, from which they were ejected. Eventually the boys led Bulger to a railway line near the disused Walton & Anfield railway station, close to Walton Lane police station and Anfield Cemetery, where they attacked him.
At the trial it was established that at this location, one of the boys threw blue Humbrol modelling paint into Bulger's left eye. They kicked him and hit him with bricks, stones and a 22-pound (10.0 kg) iron bar, described in court as a railway fishplate. They placed batteries in his mouth. Bulger suffered ten skull fractures as a result of the iron bar striking his head. Alan Williams, the case's pathologist, speculated that Bulger suffered so many injuries that none could be isolated as the fatal blow.Police suspected that there was a sexual element to the crime, since Bulger's shoes, stockings, trousers and underpants had been removed. The pathologist's report read out in court stated that Bulger's foreskin had been manipulated. When questioned about this aspect of the attack by detectives and the child psychiatrist Eileen Vizard, Thompson and Venables were reluctant to give details.
Before they left him, the boys laid Bulger across the railway tracks and weighted his head down with rubble, in the hope that a train would hit him and make his death appear to be an accident. After Bulger's killers left the scene, his body was cut in half by a train. Bulger's severed body was discovered two days later, on 14 February. A forensic pathologist testified that he had died before he was struck by the train


RIP Jamie Bulger


Edited By: MR1123 on Mar 16, 2011 15:02
2 Likes #20
hasnt one of them just been put back in prison! at 10 year old i think they knew exactly wat they were doing some of his injurys were horiffic no normal child would do such things to another human being
2 Likes #21
Never really read much about this story as it isn't very nice to read but I certainly didn't know until today that they actually planned to hurt someone that day, makes it 100 times worse now.

I bet all the people that saw him that day and did nothing / didn't realise what was going on still regret it.
1 Like #22
numptyj
shopstilldrops
No way numpty you do suprise me !!!!
My daughter is ten and yes granted may do ' do stupid things and not realise the consequences' as you put it , ......like leaving a tap running, leaving hair straightners on , leaving the fridge door open, .....but murdering a three year old boy and so brutally is on a total different league , they knew exactly what they were doing , little **** !!!!!

just got a differing opinion.

When I was young I used to break things quite a lot, toys etc, I knew what I was doing but it was never malicious intent to break the toys, it was more experimental, what if I pull the head off this action man etcI think this story can kind of be linked into that idea, the boys most likely knew they were doing something wrong by taking Jamie and by hurting him but whos to say it was always with a malicious intent or that they knew 100% from the outset they would kill him, things can get out of hand and in this case it did.



How the hell can you compare pulling the head off an action man ! or breaking toys to what these two sickos did ????, wasnt like they took him and he accidentaly got run over or fell into a river and drowned , they subjected this poor toddler to some awful things before putting him on railway tracks !!!

sorry if I dont conform to the usual opinions but that's what makes a debate!
#23
jellybaby22
Numpty I would agree if we were talking about 5 year olds but by 10 u know your actions have consequences.... Watching my 8 year old with my 1 year old shows me that... She knows even playing roughly could really hurt her and wouldn't dream of doing it to see what happens ?!?!


Everyone is different thought and you've obviosuly brought your daughter up with good morals boundaries etc. But who's to say what was going on in their heads they had been in and out of foster care I think? So there probably wasn't opportunity to teach them the true ins and outs of being right and wrong
#24
My thoughts to his family. He was the same age as my son.Its always been a haunting
episode. One we can all learn from.
#25
^^^^6sorry quote went wrong there !
1 Like #26
You are dead right numpty the core of this issue is their upbringing and how they can get to age 10 and think that this behaviour is acceptable, the whole of society let him down that day sadly.

Unfortunately some 20 years later nothing has really changed and a repeat of this story would not be a suprise.

How long did that girl starve to death for in Birmingham or how long was baby P abused for before it was too late. half the time we are too busy saving animals or people in another country before saving our own.




Edited By: greg_68 on Mar 16, 2011 15:11
#27
Btw I'm not condoning what they did was right I just think its an interesting argument (child psychology etc) in a tragic event
1 Like #28
numptyj
jellybaby22
Numpty I would agree if we were talking about 5 year olds but by 10 u know your actions have consequences.... Watching my 8 year old with my 1 year old shows me that... She knows even playing roughly could really hurt her and wouldn't dream of doing it to see what happens ?!?!


Everyone is different thought and you've obviosuly brought your daughter up with good morals boundaries etc. But who's to say what was going on in their heads they had been in and out of foster care I think? So there probably wasn't opportunity to teach them the true ins and outs of being right and wrong



Pretty basic stuff though. Natural human instincts would teach them that what they were doing was wrong. Surely?
1 Like #29
They werent in foster care , they just had rough upbringings i think ..........but even so doesnt make it any better , and theres still a lot of kids getting raised roughly /badly but doesnt mean they go on to kill a toddler , .........these two are obviously just sick in the head !
1 Like #30
numpty is entitled to his opinion....too many 'oh my days i cant believe what u like' comments floating around in threads...no offence to anyone...but saw a lot of that in gay thread.... it's like others are dissapointed in u.....u r on the net with various different people with various different opinions....
healthy debates ftw.....
banned#31
I wouldn't waist your breath numpty....Most on here suffer from some strange sort of Internet autism that limits them into only seeing things in a black or white perspective with no allowance for grey areas.
1 Like #32
shopstilldrops
They werent in foster care , they just had rough upbringings i think ..........but even so doesnt make it any better , and theres still a lot of kids getting raised roughly /badly but doesnt mean they go on to kill a toddler , .........these two are obviously just sick in the head !


Then the issue is why weren't 'we' proactive and have them picked up as being sick in the head before this happened and something doen about it rather than reacting after the event.

Edited By: greg_68 on Mar 16, 2011 15:17
#33
magicbeans
numpty is entitled to his opinion....too many 'oh my days i cant believe what u like' comments floating around in threads...no offence to anyone...but saw a lot of that in gay thread.... it's like others are dissapointed in u.....u r on the net with various different people with various different opinions....
healthy debates ftw.....


Sure he's entitled. But so are people entitled to disagree with him. Healthy debates....
#34
I know that mb and totally agree, the world wouldnt be the same if we all agreed ( although it would be easier , lol ) just Numpty has suprised me thats all , and maybe he just didnt put his debate across properly , although i still think pulling an action mans head off and what these two did as a comparison is a bit errrr, well ya know !!

Right off to do school run now !
3 Likes #35
sorry got to add my opinon here.
whether they were 10 or 5 anyone thats normal would not do the things they did its SICK!!
as for people that say they didnt know what they were doing (and i am not just going off this thread )
i am pretty sure anyone knows child or not that if you drop a 3 year old on its head whack it with 22lb bar and brick him that they are going to kill him.
they were clever enough to know what they were doing when they placed his body on those tracks to try and cover it up.
1 Like #36
They did know right from wrong they just didn't care.
2 Likes #37
Is the op an attention seeker?

Are you going to list the landmark birthdays of every high profile child murder?

What about all the children that have died that haven't made the TV?

A pointless cathartic post if you ask me!
#38
greg_68
shopstilldrops
They werent in foster care , they just had rough upbringings i think ..........but even so doesnt make it any better , and theres still a lot of kids getting raised roughly /badly but doesnt mean they go on to kill a toddler , .........these two are obviously just sick in the head !

Then the issue is why weren't 'we' reactive and have them picked up as being sick in the head before this happened and something doen about it rather than reacting after the event.


True , but going by reports thet were just 'typical scallies' being naughty in school etc ,( robert thompson was apparantly the worst of the two and led Jon venables astray ) but i suppose no one knew that at 10 yrs old no matter how naughty/ rough they were that they could commit such a crime .
1 Like #39
deek72
numptyj
jellybaby22
Numpty I would agree if we were talking about 5 year olds but by 10 u know your actions have consequences.... Watching my 8 year old with my 1 year old shows me that... She knows even playing roughly could really hurt her and wouldn't dream of doing it to see what happens ?!?!


Everyone is different thought and you've obviosuly brought your daughter up with good morals boundaries etc. But who's to say what was going on in their heads they had been in and out of foster care I think? So there probably wasn't opportunity to teach them the true ins and outs of being right and wrong



Pretty basic stuff though. Natural human instincts would teach them that what they were doing was wrong. Surely?


Everyone is different and has a different capacity, why do we help those with mental illness or learning disability needs...should natural human instincts tell them that they're not to grope someone in a supermarket or defecate and spread it over the walls.
Overall its down to upbringing, they didn't get a great one, maybe if they did then it may not have happened, even if they did who's to say it still wouldn't have happened?
1 Like #40
Or a cynical attempt to earn the next level celebrity badge!

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!