Jump to content

Talk:Murder of James Bulger/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Parole hearing

The parole hearing for Jon Venables is currently taking place.[1]. A decision on whether to release him will be made within the next ten days.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:25, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

This is in the news today. It says that Venables is "likely to be kept in prison “for the foreseeable future” for his own safety because of the risk that he will reveal his true identity if he is released." It also points out that "A High Court order bans the media from reporting Venables’s new identity, his appearance or where he was living at the time of his arrest last year, apart from the fact that he had been living in Cheshire. Mr Justice Bean said in his ruling that there was “compelling evidence” he would be attacked if his identity became known."--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Bulger killer "could be in line for compensation from News of the World"

This is in the news today.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Suicide in Scotland

Father killed himself after hate mob wrongly accused him of being James Bulger child killer Robert Thompson is in the news. It is unclear whether the accusation was the primary cause of his death, so it is too speculative for the article. More coverage here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

details of crime.

i may be being over sensitive , but with all of these types of crimes ,is it really needed to go into so much detail. the exact details can be found elsewhere. i came for info on the crime and felt that the description of what they did seems to revel in describing it all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.41.170 (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

The article's tone is intentionally flat and non-emotional, so I don't see any "reveling". The appropriate amount of detail for the crime itself is open to discussion, but at present it does not exactly dominate the article, and I don't see a great case for cutting it down. This article like all others is subject to the content disclaimer and the no censorship policy. CT Cooper · talk 13:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
If you don't care for what you're reading, stop reading. WP articles are written for the entire world, not just you. And, to the degree that Wikipedia policies are followed, everything in Wikipedia can be found elsewhere, so that's no grounds for not including something. -- 96.248.226.133 (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Parental neglect

This is unpopular, but it needs to be said. The mother of James Bulger left him outside the butchers while she went in to purchase meat. If she hadn't have had her son killed in such horrible circumstances she would have been facing a criminal prosecution. It is important that we include this in the article. 144.124.24.57 (talk) 14:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC) http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/weird/kids2/killing_3.html http://karisable.com/mbulg.htm

This is both inaccurate and unfair. Most sources refer to Bulger's mother being distracted in the butcher's shop, and this was accepted at the trial.[2] Claiming deliberate neglect has WP:BLP issues.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
She left him outside the butchers shop where he wandered off. Might I suggest you look up the definition of neglect and apply it to this situation? 144.124.24.57 (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
This would lead to a potentially libellous accusation being made. The exact sequence of events may never be known, but neither of the sources mentioned above says explicitly that she left him outside the shop. James Bulger had been boisterous on the day in question, and it is possible that he was taken into the shop and wandered outside while his mother was distracted. I'm not sure why you are keen to make such an issue of this, as it is very unkind to Denise Fergus.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
The talk page is not for forum discussion on what happened, including who was and wasn't at fault. If several reliable sources explicitly criticized the action of Denise Fergus, then there might be a case of mentioning them, but I don't see that here. Including such content without such backing would not only violate the biographies of living persons policy but would also be original research, which isn't permitted in articles. CT Cooper · talk 15:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
The prosecution and defence at the trial agreed not to dispute the basic facts of the case in order to spare the feelings of Bulger's parents. The Guardian citation used in the article says "At about 3.40pm they went into a butcher's shop. Mr Henriques said: 'Mrs Bulger believed James was by her side when she was being served - but when she looked down, he was gone.' This clearly places both of them inside the butcher's shop.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
A book I read, Children Who Kill, clearly states that this is not true. I got my information from there. Honestly I am more inclined to believe a peer-reviewed text than what the tabloids say. 144.124.24.57 (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
got to say does sound a reliable source 144.124.4.81 (talk) 11:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with that book, and I can't currently identify which one is being referred to as there are multiple books with that title. Offline sources are allowed, but the peer review/editorial process for books, like with newspapers, can vary wildly and I can't really judge without seeing the text - please do not post it to Wikipedia, as this would be a copyright violation. In any case, I was not aware that there was any real dispute here. CT Cooper · talk 11:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Go on put it in the article worth mentioning Rastadon1987 (talk) 11:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
This was checked out after the controversy yesterday. The version accepted in court was that Bulger and his mother went into the butcher's shop at around 3:40pm, and that she lost track of him while momentarily distracted. CCTV footage shows Bulger being led away by Thompson and Venables outside the shop.[3] Claims of child neglect in this incident have clear WP:BLP and WP:LIBEL issues.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
"it needs to be said" -- No, it doesn't, and certainly not in this article. -- 96.248.226.133 (talk) 05:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Once again, could all these socks run out of Wales please desist. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Given the apparent sock-puppet activity going on here, my assumption of good faith in the person (who seems to be using multiple accounts/IPs) requesting such content be added is now greatly diminished. Personally I don't even believe the book says what is claimed, since I've done a lot of reading on this topic in the past and found no great controversy as claimed. CT Cooper · talk 12:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

In the media

Bold textElizabeth George retels in her detective novel "This body of death", 16th in the Inspector Lynley story, the murder of James Bulger. She names him John Dresser and uses thre childkillers instead of two. See also the review of the "From The Richmond Times Dispatch" @ http://www.elizabethgeorgeonline.com/reviews/body_of_death.htm (Swalve) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swalve (talk • contribs) 16:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

New book

There is coverage in the UK media today of a new book by Ralph Bulger.[4][5][6] This was added as one of the external links. February 2013 marks the twentieth anniversary of the murder.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:59, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

New Twitter controversy

There is fresh controversy over an alleged photograph of Venables as an adult on Twitter.[7]. This is similar to what happened in May 2011. [8] It would break a UK court order for the article to point out any material on the Internet allegedly identifying Venables. I held off on adding this for the time being as it also has WP:RECENTISM issues and does not seem notable enough.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:58, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, they are pictures that have been around online for a couple of years now, only resurfacing because of the anniversary. 88.104.55.147 (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
If someone is arrested and appears in court over this incident, it would be worth mentioning. The alleged photos of Venables as an adult have been circulating on the Internet since 2011, so there is not much new here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:48, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Child's Play 3

Much of the action in Child's Play 3 takes place at a military academy. At around 58 minutes into the film, the cadets take part in a training exercise, called the annual war games, where they are split into a red team and a blue team. They are issued with guns that can fire red and blue paint. The climax of the film, at around one hour and twenty minutes, takes place at a funfair ghost train ride, where the main risk to the characters is falling into the blades of a giant ventilator fan. There is a screenshot here with four images showing these scenes. Many of the UK tabloid newspaper descriptions of what happens during the film are wildly inaccurate or just plain wrong. The Guardian citation here gives a measured and accurate description of the link. Jon Venables' father is known to have rented the film on video, but it was never established that Venables or Thompson had watched it. The judge expressed a view that violent videos may have played a part in influencing the actions of the two children, but this was buried under a mountain of tabloid hysteria and speculative links with Child's Play 3.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

In this article in The Independent, it says "Child's Play 3 contains scenes in which an obsessed doll, Chucky, dies after being splattered with paint and having its face pulped; James Bulger was splashed with paint and battered to death." Chucky is splashed with blue paint on his left shoulder when the blue team opens fire during the paintball war game (1 hour and eleven minutes into the film). The damage to Chucky's face occurs when a scythe from one of the characters on the ghost train ride strikes his face (1 hour and 20 minutes). There is a screenshot of these scenes here. Merseyside Police and the judge went separate ways over the link to violent videos. While the judge suggested that there was a link, a detective commented "I don't know where the judge got that idea from. I couldn't believe it when I heard him. We went through something like 200 titles rented by the Venables family. There were some you or I wouldn't want to see, but nothing - no scene, or plot, or dialogue - where you could put your finger on the freeze button and say that influenced a boy to go out and commit murder."[10] In this article in The Sun from 2009, it says that "James Bulger’s killers Robert Thompson and Jon Venables were fans of Child’s Play 3." Goodness knows where they got this idea from, as it was never proved that either child had seen the film. This is an example of the tabloid distortion that has dogged attempts to show a link with the film.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Parole bid for Venables

According to The Sun, Venables will make a bid for parole later in May 2013.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure enough, Venables is now applying for parole.[11] Not sure about whether to add this to the article, as the news story says "The board has given no indication of how long it will take to consider Venables' parole application."--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 04:41, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
The current wording of the 4 July news coverge is unclear. It has been qualified by "sources say" rather than a formal announcement that Venables will definitely be released. Things need to be clearer to avoid WP:RECENTISM before adding this to the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
What does a person have to do in the UK in order to be kept behind bars? And that's an honest question. I mean, he killed a child, then - on release - was found in possession of violent child pornograhphy (all in the article) and yet, just two years on, and he is being released again. Is it legally impossible in the UK to keep someone behind bars? 2.13.176.93 (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm more concerned with the notion that because some anonymous and insignificant court in the UK says that certain information must be kept secret, somehow wikipedia is obligated to censor itself.Jonny Quick (talk) 03:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Spark (Amy Macdonald song)

Re: this edit. Spark (Amy Macdonald song) has a very tangential link to the Bulger case, because she denied that it was based on the case and said only that it was "a catalyst" in the sourcing. This makes it akin to Boy A (film), which has similarities but is not based on the Bulger case. The Amy Macdonald song is too tangential for a See also section. It also looks as though the tabloids have tried to hype up the song's link to the case, even though she very specifically denied it in this interview:

Is 'Spark' really about the death of James Bulger? "No, it's not. That's a made up story from The Sun - what I said was completely taken out of context. When I read what The Sun had written, it totally shocked me because I'd never really been the victim of that kind of thing before. It made me feel really terrible because I thought people might get upset by what they thought I'd said."--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Spoken article link

The version of the article is from February 2007. This is too long ago to give a proper look at the case and its ramifications. I don't support including this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:10, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:BLPSOURCES

Just as a reminder, as this article deals with living people, we cannot use material sourced from tabloids. I just removed a bunch; can regular editors be vigilant about more creeping back in? Thanks a lot. --John (talk) 19:52, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The Daily Mail isn't my favourite newspaper, but that doesn't mean that everything in it is wrong. You seem to have an ongoing vendetta against the Mail and remove all citations from it arbitrarily. It would have been better to add [citation needed] because some of the statements cited to the Mail are uncontroversial, eg, the fact that the judge ruled at the trial the names of the killers should be released is not a controversial BLP claim, which is why WP:BLPSOURCES exists. Likewise, it isn't controversial that in 2010 a man in Lancashire was wrongly accused of being Jon Venables. Here is a source from The Guardian [12]. Please avoid removing material without attempting to re-source it first.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:56, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Your misunderstanding of BLP is not my responsibility. Your suggestion of adding {{cn}} tags to controversial statements on living people is not a helpful one. Well done for eventually adding proper sources to the article so it is now compliant. I will be happy to block anyone who adds or restores tabloid material to this article in the future. --John (talk) 10:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Man from Ramsbottom

Not sure if this incident is really notable enough for a mention in the article. It did not receive widespread media coverage, and the wording of the news story, "his grieving mum has claimed" and "said to have lost a job because of the rumours" is not the same as a coroner endorsing this view at the inquest.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

"James Bulger killer Jon Venables joins dating website under different name"

Venables is on the front page of the Mirror today, The story about a dating site is similar to the story about Facebook in March 2013. Nothing much to see here, although it shows that the tabloids still regard anything to do with the case as a potential headline.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Doli incapax

Re this edit: In 1993, the applicable legislation was the Children and Young Persons Act 1963, which set the age of criminal responsiblilty at 10. Between the ages of 10 and 14, a rebuttal presumption of doli incapax applied. This does not refer to whether the child knew the difference between right and wrong, but whether the child was capable of forming intent to commit a crime, known in law as mens rea, and known in English as malice aforethought [13] or "mischievous discretion" for juveniles.[14] Since Thompson and Venables clearly set out to abduct and kill a child and were not found to be mentally ill by a psychiatrist, the prosecution was able to rebut doli incapax and the trial went ahead.[15][16] The decision to allow Thompson and Venables to be tried for murder at the age of 10 remains controversial, but it was within UK law at the time. Disclaimer: IANAL.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Title

Would a better title not be "manslaughter of James Bulger"? In court it was decided not to be a murder but rather a death from circumstances. There is a difference in UK law which is not reflected in wikipedia.Equivocasmannus (talk) 18:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

No, they were tried and convicted for murder, and this is one of the most notable legal features of the case. The trial judge ruled that there was nothing wrong with the boys which would prevent a murder trial (see doli incapax in the article). They are the youngest convicted murderers in modern English legal history.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Does WP:NOTCENSORED apply here?

Within this article the F-word is censored with two asterisks in regards to a Facebook page which was set up to mock the murder. Should this actually be censored or not? Chesnaught555 (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

This comes from a news source which says "A Facebook group was set up by a twisted troll called: "What happened to Jamie Bulger was f**king hilarious."[17] Although I am guessing that the Facebook page did say "fucking", this would be original research as the source itself does not say this. It is best to stick with the source. By the way, this link has expired so it has been replaced with one from the Wayback Machine.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I noticed the source had expired myself, which is one of the reasons I asked. Does the new source say anything about whether or not it was censored? Chesnaught555 (talk) 11:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
It is the same page as it appeared on 3 April 2012, only it is an archived version. I suspect that Click Liverpool removed the letters "u" and "c" to spare its readers the gory details, but this is what the source says.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, thank you. Chesnaught555 (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Murder of James Bulger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:22, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Murder of James Bulger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:45, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Twitter case

This is the latest court case set off by a person using Twitter. The trial date of 15 February next year is a long way off.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

This is in court earlier than expected. The 20-year-old woman who sent the messages appears to have mental health problems.[18]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
This resulted in a three year prison sentence, which is quite considerable.[19] It appears to be the first time that a person has actually gone to prison for Internet posts about the Bulger case, rather than receiving a suspended sentence.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:43, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

UK tabloids, WP:RS reliability of a direct quote?

Re this section blanking.

Raised at WP:RSN: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#UK tabloids again - James Bulger and reliability of a direct quote. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Playground (2016 film)

Re this edit: This was reverted because Playground, which is a Polish language film, is loosely inspired by rather than based on the James Bulger case.[20] This is also true of the US film Little Monsters (2012) [21] and the British film Boy A (2007). They have borrowed some of the ideas but do not reference the Bulger case directly, so I don't think that they meet WP:POPCULTURE guidelines.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Out of the three films, Little Monsters probably has the closest inspiration from the Bulger case. If you really want to watch Little Monsters it is on YouTube, and it is more of a Z movie than a B movie. There is very little reliable sourcing mentioning it so it fails WP:DUE.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Denise Fergus has commented on the new Polish film Playground in the Daily Mail.[22] The screenwriter/director Bartosz M Kowalski says that the film is based on real life events and has declined to be specific, although it is widely regarded as inspired by the Bulger case.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Venables back in prison? - November 2017

re this edit: It has been reported that Venables is back in prison again after being found in possession of child abuse images.[23] However, the media is still using phrases of the "sources said last night" variety with no official confirmation, which runs into problems with WP:BLP. This needs some firmer sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:31, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Audio version of the article

Listen to this page (20 minutes)
Spoken Wikipedia icon
This audio file was created from a revision of this page dated 18 February 2007 (2007-02-18), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
(Audio help · More spoken articles)

Re this edit: I removed the audio version because it dates from February 2007 and is now way too old to reflect the current version of the article. If a person has vision problems, it would be better to use Microsoft Narrator or similar software to read the current text of the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Pop songs about the case

Re this edit and this edit: It's true that the songs "Sacrifice" by Gary Numan (1994) and the Porcupine Tree song "This Is No Rehearsal" (1999) contain indirect references to the case. However, the lyrics don't reference the case directly and both songs are obscure to the point where they have problems with WP:DUE and WP:POPCULTURE. They aren't in the same league as the song "I Don't Like Mondays" which was a number one hit in 1979, and is clearly based on the Cleveland Elementary School shooting (San Diego). Neither of the Bulger songs is worth mentioning here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:21, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I'd support including such if they are supported by independent sources commenting on their use of, or relevance to, the case (or the ongoing behaviour of Venables); i.e. some indication that they're more than just a passing reference. I'm not seeing that here. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

25th anniversary

This month marks the 25th anniversary of the murder. This has led to various news articles, and two new television documentaries. There is one on Channel 4 [24] and ITV [25] broadcast this week.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Separate Jon Venables article

(non-admin closure) This has been running since May with no support since the original proposal. Venables is primarily notable for the murder of James Bulger. His return to prison for child porn offences does not warrant a separate BLP article and can be covered by a few paragraphs in this article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 04:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Venables has now received massive press coverage for offences, and paedophilia revelations, unrelated to the Bulger murder. WP:GNG is satisfied. 2A02:C7F:8E0C:6600:943D:53E4:5CFF:4DC8 (talk) 11:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Not sure about this because it runs into the usual problems with WP:BLP1E. A biography has to be rounded and detailed, and not simply repeat 80% - 90% of material from another article. It's true that some famous criminals have biographies on Wikipedia, but not all do. If you look at Moors murders (which is a Featured Article), Ian Brady and Myra Hindley don't have separate articles, although there have been requests for this in the past. Venables has received additional media coverage because he has been sent to prison twice for child porn offences since his release, but his main source of notability is the 1993 murder case. I'm not convinced that Jon Venables needs a separate article, but let's see what others think.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 12:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I really don't see what the benefit would be in creating a separate article as it all seems to fit in perfectly here. His further offences aren't particularly notable on their own and relevant categories can still be added to the "Jon Venables" redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakehandsman (talk • contribs) 22:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. His subsequent convictions wouldn't rate an article were it not for his involvement in this case. A truly ridiculous number of offenders return to prison for further offences, including child porn offences; there's nothing in that which establishes independent notability. Marianna251TALK 23:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose As others have said, he is only featured in the media as a result of the murder. Reli source (talk) 00:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for all of the reasons already mentioned that I don't need to repeat. --TBM10 (talk) 20:42, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New documentary November 2018

There is a new documentary on Channel 5 at 9pm this evening, titled James Bulger: The New Revelations.[26] It claims to have "new and startling evidence" but we'll see.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:36, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

There were some new transcripts from the case, but nothing much startlingly new. Thompson is "said to have asked police interrogators whether the two-year-old had been taken to hospital to “get him alive again”."[27]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:37, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
It clarifies that Thomson -like many children of his age -didn't understand the finality of death. The law takes capacity into account hence the minimum age for a murder charge but I think its worth adding as it clarifies the point for readers. JRPG (talk) 11:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Tina Malone

Tina Malone is the latest person to face possible legal action after allegedly publishing up to date photos of Jon Venables on social media.[28] It's unclear what will happen here, and it isn't worth adding to the article at the moment.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Perpetrators subsection

Would this be worth adding? I've seen it on other articles on crimes, such as this one for example. ExpendableAcc1971 (talk) 23:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

There are no separate articles for Thompson and Venables. As for a separate subsection with biographical details, this would require adequate sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 04:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Venables to move overseas?

Re this edit: the story started out as the front page headline in the Daily Star Sunday on 23 June 2019, as shown here. This isn't really a reliable source, and if you look at the original story there, it doesn't go much beyond the usual "unnamed sources said last night" stuff which is nowhere near confirming the banner headline in the newspaper. Many people have pointed out that the chances of Venables being allowed to emigrate to Canada, Australia, New Zealand or anywhere else are pretty much zero due to his criminal record. Normally an unnamed source in a UK red top tabloid would fail Wikipedia sourcing guidelines by a mile, but it is interesting that Jacinda Ardern commented on this.[29] Otherwise, it is part of the long history of dubious UK tabloid stories about the case.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:47, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Venables is back on the front page page of the Daily Star Sunday today.[30] This time the story says "Top-level sources insist plans for a permanent move to another country –most likely Canada – are “in motion”." This has previously been rejected as unlikely due to Venables' criminal record, and the Star is still citing unnamed off-the-record sources rather than any government official. It is hard to believe any of this on the basis of off-the-record briefings.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:20, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
  • The rules for immigration to Canada say "at least five years must have passed since the end of your criminal sentence (this includes probation) and the day you committed the act that made you inadmissible". This should rule out Venables immediately on the grounds of his 2018 child porn conviction, so unless the UK government gave Venables a new identity and did not tell the Canadian government, this is a non-starter. The government in New Zealand has already said this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:35, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Responsible Child

This article about a new BBC drama mentions the Bulger case, and the drama may have been inspired by some elements of the case. However, like some previous dramas such as Boy A, it is not based directly on the case, so it probably isn't notable enough for the article here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Complaints over school homework project

Interesting news story here in the Oxford Mail. There were some complaints from parents when children at the Cooper School, Bicester were asked to research the James Bulger murder case, to look at the concepts of "God and Evil" for religious education in Year 8; the children are around 12 years old. The children were asked to research "respectable websites' such as the BBC and newspapers to 'avoid inappropriate material'." Apparently, this Wikipedia article is not respectable, see the photo here. It is reported that the homework project has been pulled following the controversy. Not sure if this is notable enough for the article unless there is more coverage.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

News article about Sir Richard Henriques' new book

This is in the news today. Richard Henriques was the lead prosecution counsel at the trial. He insists that the murder charge was correct despite the boys being ten years old and the time and the criticism that it caused. If this was in any newspaper other than the D*ily M*il it could be used as a reference or an external link.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Venables and parole in September 2020

Re this edit: the Daily Mirror is reporting today that Venables has been turned down for parole.[31] The wording in the story is "It is understood he has been told it will be two years before he can apply for parole again." This isn't ideal, along with the tabloid sourcing which should be avoided. The Mirror may have been told this, but they don't give an on the record source. As things stand, Venables is still in prison with no immediate prospect of being released. Venables is half way through a 40 month sentence imposed in 2018, and it appears that he will be staying in prison for the time being. The current wording in the article is ok and does not need updating.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

New Channel 5 documentary

There is a new two part television documentary called Lost Boy: The Killing of James Bulger, which will be broadcast on Channel 5 at 9pm on 10 and 11 March 2021.[32] Both parts are an hour and a half, so it is quite a long documentary.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

2010 return to prison

Our current claim:

On 2 March 2010, the Ministry of Justice revealed that Jon Venables had been returned to prison ... On 7 March, Venables was returned to prison

is self-contradictory. Can anyone unpick this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:32, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

What happened was that the media initially reported that Venables had been returned to prison, but was unable to say why, possibly for legal reasons. It was not until around 7 March that the media reported that it was for child pornography offences. The Guardian cite here makes this clear. The Sky News cite here makes clear that Jack Straw declined to give specifics about why Venables was recalled to prison in March 2010, although the media had reported that it was for child pornography offences.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Re this edit: The source here says "Timmy, an 18-year-old child murderer on the eve of his release from secure unit into halfway house." Since this is written by Peter Morris, it should be seen as reliable. It's unclear where the source here says that Timmy is 19, it uses Google Books and doesn't appear to confirm this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:22, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Top 25 Report

This article had 806,319 views during the week 4-10 July 2021, which is pretty huge. What set it off was this podcast in the United States. It is 85 minutes long and I haven't had the chance to listen to it all yet. The intro here isn't very accurate. It says "When 2-year-old James goes missing at the mall his mom is quick to start her frantic search. Within seconds he had disappeared into the crowd. When the police arrive and show her the CCTV footage everyone is relieved. James had been lured out of the mall by two 10-year-old boys. Thank god it’s not some creepy old man." Police originally believed that they were looking for teenagers and did not know that Thompson and Venables were only 10 years old until they were arrested.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Mother of the victim

This is in The Sun (United Kingdom). There are WP:RS issues, but the recollections of the brothers who were born after the murder don't add much to what is already known. There are also WP:BLPNAME problems.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Death of Venables?

Re this edit: Venables spent yesterday evening dead on Twitter, but it appears that he is still here. The social media rumour mill strikes again.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

The Cranberries

Looking at the quote here, the song contains only a brief and indirect reference to the Bulger case, and does not refer to it by name. It isn't notable enough for a mention here, and is more on topic at No need to argue. ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Murder_of_James_Bulger/Archive_3&oldid=1214157681"