[Shasown]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

I still don't see the inconsistency, as the point about the Bolger case is that the system does not always work and very young offenders who are given the benefit of the doubt 'can' and 'do' re-offend.
Just as an aside, the creation of child pornography necessitates the rape of children. Without an audience, the pornography would never be made. Much lesser? Debatable.

Okay first off let me point out the correct spelling of the name is Bulger.

Second the Bulger case was about the abduction and murder of Jamie Bulger, the people who committed the crime were caught, tried and convicted, and sentenced, end of case.

Third, the two individuals responsible for the murder were re-sentenced by a civil servant (Michael Howard 1994) due to public opinion, that decision was challenged in ECHR and overturned.

Other ECHR rulings removed the "At Her Majestys Pleasure" type sentence and required offenders to be given definitive tariffs or sentences. This caused a minimum tariff of 8 years to be set on them.

In 1999 following an appeal by their lawyers the ECHR upheld their claim they were denied a fair hearing by the nature of the court proceedings for their trial.

The 8 year tariff expired in February 2001.

The psychologists and other staff dealing with them would have preferred them to stay in custody and treatment for an indeterminate time longer. The boys themselves didnt feel ready to be released.

However because a definite time could not be given to the Parole Board, the view was taken they were as ready as they would ever be, as further time after they reached 18 would have to be spent in adult prisons and this would probably undo the work on rehabilitation already carried out.

One other point to bear in mind, the 11 year old in the OP is in the USA, they dont have the ECHR overseeing their decisions, whilst they do have minimum and maximum sentences, their judicial review and Parole system is different to ours.

As for your aside, whilst possession and distribution of child pornography is serious, its not as bad as making the pornography itself, nor is it as bad as abducting and murdering a child, is it?