UR TV CAST

There is absolutely no rule as to how long that can take ­ it can be anything from days to months.” The two killers, who are both 19 in August and have spent their entire eight-year detention period in local authority secure accommodation, are likely to be released initially into a halfway house.Protesters from the pressure group Mothers Against Murder and Aggression are planning to hold a demonstration outside the Parole Board’s London headquarters today. Dee Warner, their spokeswoman, said: “Is there an expert panel that is going to give us a 100 per cent guarantee that they will never commit another offence like that? Is anyone going to be held accountable if they do commit a new offence?”They are promising a vigil for James Bulger and a “completely peaceful protest” in marked contrast to the scenes of howling mobs that accompanied the trial. The murder of James Bulger ­ condemned in November 1993 by the trial judge, Mr Justice Morland, at Preston Crown Court as “an act of unparalleled barbarity” ­ was treated with a degree of revulsion almost without equal in British judicial history, particularly in the North-west. The pair were 10 when they abducted the toddler from the Strand shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, in February 1993. They dragged him to a nearby railway line where they tortured him and left him to die.An eight-year minimum sentence was recommended and increased to 10 years by Lord Taylor of Gosforth, Lord Chief Justice at the time. The European Court of Human Rights later ruled that the former home secretary Michael Howard acted illegally when he raised the tariff to 15 years. Last year Lord Woolf paved the way for parole by cutting the recommended sentence to seven years, eight months James’s family have repeatedly condemned the release.

James’s father, Ralph Bulger, who recently failed in a High Court attempt to block their early release, has insisted he has been denied justice and pledged to do his best to “hunt them down”.More than 400 people marched through the streets of his home town of Kirkby earlier this year to protest against the prospect of the killers’ early release.Circulating around the Liverpool suburb are rumours of a bounty to anyone who tracks either Thompson or Venables down. Merseyside Police have launched an internal inquiry into how photographs of the pair, taken in 1993 and believed to originate from police files, have been leaked. And last week it was revealed that vigilantes were proposing to publish the recent CCTV photograph of Thompson on a foreign internet site. Dominic Lloyd, Thompson’s solicitor, said: “The threat of vigilante action has been with us for a long time.”The very cloak of mystery that surrounds the boys has sparked intense speculation about the men they have turned into. While certain sections of the media reacted with anger to the anonymity granted to the two killers, most are likely to abide by the High Court injunction unless they feel confident in citing overwhelming public interest. However, it will not stop the information filtering through to journalists.The News of the World, while not publishing the location of Venables’ new home, gave every impression yesterday of having seen the “life of luxury” he will enjoy.

It insisted that the young man will join his parents in a £65,000 three-bedroom turn-of-the-century semi in the north of England. The housing association property with a “second-hand family saloon parked in the drive” is on a new estate close to a railway and nursery schools.But it is not the established media the two men must fear most. The very international nature of their notoriety has made them particularly vulnerable to identification via the internet.Thompson and Venables will live life pursued by those who believe, rightly or wrongly, that they have been insufficiently punished for their abhorrent crime. And there may well come a day when the Bulger family campaigners are not the only ones who wish the pair were back behind bars.. Magistrates should study the television characters of Lenny Henry to help them understand young black offenders who appear in their courts, a new judicial training manual recommends. Magistrates should study the television characters of Lenny Henry to help them understand young black offenders who appear in their courts, a new judicial training manual recommends.
At the same time, magistrates are warned about adopting the “off-putting” interview style of Terry Wogan when they question young people on their crimes. References to popular culture abound in the Youth Court Bench Book, which will be issued to justices of the peace next month.

The telephone directory-sized volume says it is no longer acceptable to plead ignorance to the fads, fashions, drugs and illnesses of the young.The angst-ridden cry of Harry Enfield’s Kevin the Teenager ­ “You don’t understand me!” ­ will be finally answered in the courtroom.A draft copy of the Bench Book, drawn up by the Judicial Studies Board, which is responsible for training judges and magistrates, explains what happens during adolescence It says: “Adolescents are moody. They can alternate between being unreliable and being dependable and responsible. As they begin to separate psychologically from the family they are likely to oppose family rules, values and expectations. These are often turbulent years.”The “Terry Wogan” style of questioning, which involves asking and answering your own question, is discredited as “redundant” because it does not give the defendant a chance to offer any information to the court. The guide illustrates the “Wogan problem” by posing a question in the style of the celebrity interviewer: “How did your parents feel when they knew you were in trouble with the police?… I am sure they were most unhappy.”Magistrates are also reminded not to base their decisions on first impressions. The guide says: “Young teenage Afro-Caribbean males will, within their culture, acceptably define their masculinity through behaviour which would be defined as exhibitionism within Western [white] culture.” To avoid stereotyping young black offenders, magistrates are asked to “reflect upon the way in which Lenny Henry parodies such personalities”.They are also told that just because an Asian teenage girl refuses to look the magistrate in the eye it doesn’t mean she has something to hide.