[Angus]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

I agree with almost all of the post, apart from the bit in bold. I think there are individuals who are irredeemable and it's a gross error to assume that EVERYONE is 'fixable'. They're not. What happens if we keep trying to fix them and, every time we think the job's done, they go out and kill someone else? A civilised society SHOULDN'T take risks with the safety of the general public because of liberal intentions - however good those intentions may be. We cannot know for certain either way in relation to this boy and it's a matter for psychiatric experts to decide. Particularly in relation to children, we're probably a long way from satisfactory methods of assessment; the Jamie Bolger case seems to indicate this.

Completely agree. What's more I have little interest in the sob stories of those who say they have been rehabilitated unless they are accompanied by solid evidence that they made restitution to those that they abused/assaulted/stole from etc etc. I am more concerned as to the welfare and future of the victim, not the criminal. If someone has killed someone, I have less than zero interest in their future wellbeing and would work on the assumption that anyone capable of killing a human being in the first place, does not deserve my trust or confidence that they will not re-offend.

As to the allegations that those of us who wish to see murderers kept well away from mainstream society are simply hellbent on revenge, that is the typical response of your average liberal apologist. How about the fact that what we want to see is actual, equitable and appropriate JUSTICE?