NCJ Number
185092
Journal
Journal of Law and Society Volume: 27 Issue: 3 Dated: September 2000 Pages: 416-448
Date Published
September 2000
Length
33 pages
Annotation
This article examines the political context and rights implications of the United Kingdom and European rulings in the Venables-Thompson case.
Abstract
In 1993, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson both of them children were found guilty of the abduction and murder of 2-year-old James Bulger. Aged 10 at the time of the offense, they were tried in an adult court before a judge and jury amidst a blaze of publicity. They were named by the trial judge and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure. The Home Secretary set a minimum tariff of 15 years imprisonment. In December 1999 the European Court of Human Rights held that, in the context of the trial and the fixing of the tariff, the United Kingdom government had violated the European Convention on Human Rights. This article discusses how the case became a watershed in youth justice procedure and practice influencing Labor proposals for reform and the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. Examining the progression of appeals through the domestic and European courts, it explores the dichotomous philosophies separating the United Kingdom and European approaches to the age of criminal responsibility, the prosecution and punishment of children and the influence of political policy on judicial decisions. It also analyzes the backlash against "threatening children," the affirmation of adult power and knowledge and the implications of the European judgments in the context of a rights-based agenda. Notes