Nope I can read very well, there hasn't however been any concrete evidence put forward to support any of the claims that there are people who can't be rehabilitated and should just be put to death instead of making any attempt to help them. And I also don't think that everything will be alright in the end, I just don't hold the view that we should ignore what causes people to do things they do or that we should execute them as a way of obtaining "justice".
That's nothing more than conjecture on your part, you have no idea what was going through the heads prior to, during or after the attack. You've decided that they were perfectly rational individuals whose thought processes would be no different to yours and have therefore concluded that they would go through the rational steps of planning an attack and attempting to cover it up.
And perhaps that was a mistake and that he truly wasn't ready to be released from prison. Doesn't mean that he would have never reach a point where he could be released from prison without being a risk to anyone.
No it doesn't seem to me that he's a person that's been rehabilitated, it doesn't however mean that he can't be rehabilitated. Do you have any information or records relating to the therapy and rehabilitation he recived in prison or after his release? Do you have any idea about what help he got in the years between the murder of James Bulger and the current day? If not, which I assume to be the most likely answer, how do you know if he recieved anywhere near the amount of rehabilitation he would need to be able to operate in a near normal fashion with society? Or have you just decided that he must have recieved enough rehabiliation, with no evidence of that fact, and therefore must be incurable?
Yes, we lock him up until such a time that he can truly be deemed to not be a danger to the public, then if he is released he is watched and supported much more closely in an attempt to get him to reintegrate into society.
Or perhaps with proper therapy and support he does manage to reintegrate into society and can perform some useful role?
I've never said it wasn't his fault, of course he has to hold some responsibility for the act as he was the one who committed it. But to ignore the role that his childhood had on his actions screams of wanting nothing more than revenge and retribution, i.e. he killed a kid so you want to see him die regardless of the fact he was also a child. Also to pretend that society has no responsibility is just plain naive, society has created an atmosphere in which any final stage of his rehabilitation, i.e. reintegration into society, is made nearly impossible by the retards who think that it's morally acceptable to kill people as a form of vigilante justice.
