I believe its being considered (if Ive got it right-and Im not 100% sure), NOT to name convicted offenders (however serious the crime) who are under 18 -- to give them anonymity for ever, for the sake of their families, and to save their own lives being ruined.

How do Wiki folk feel about this?

IF this is the case

i personally think it depends on the crime. but then the whole issue of mental capacity comes into it. it's an absolute minefield which we won't get sorted on this website so despite opinion, nothing is going to get changed no matter how strong an opinion is and how it's voiced.

might as well accept what's what and carry on with our lives.

Why arrest offenders ? let them all free to roam the streets, sorry to sound despondent, but it appears that prolific offenders are given chance after chance and just treat it as a weakness of the system, vicious assaults on the elderly, children and the disabled, sickening violence, not only should they name them they should publish their pictures for those types of crime, they have no place in a civilised society.

If that is the case, then it means they can do whatever they wish, with no punishment. No criminal record, probably no conviction anyway, just a slap on the wrist. We know that young offenders places are not the best for young people, but with the possibility of the 'no name' being considered, what do we do?
The threat of naming them from any age, would, to my mind , probably have more impact than putting them under lock and key. Teenagers are very impressionable and easily succumb to peer pressure.
They all need a darn good wake -up call and instead of being allowed to go to school on kids 'scooters' in 2nd year senior school, they should be carrying the shopping for their mums, and instead of all going to the same school and living within a stones throw of each other(how they form their little gangs) they should be sent far and wide to different schools as kids were when we had the 11 plus. Note, it doesn't seem to happen on Wirral so much, as in most cases our children go to schools a distance from where they live.

Madness..yet again! Name them.

Dyou know what- I cant find anything on the net about this at all. Could I have imagined it I wonder , because it does sound nutty doesnt it . As you say Granny , what would be the deterrent.
I thought Id heard an argument probably on radio , that the cost of protecting the Bulger killers was astronomical and labour intensive , and that that wouldnt have happened if their real names hadnt been released .

I thought I heard another person arguing that if anonymity was kept, then people with grievances may pursue the wrong person for a crime and a whole neighbourhood could wrongly ruin that innocent persons life as rumours spread.

I thought I heard someone saying that what chance of rehabilitation in society would offenders like the Bulger killers have if they were constantly pursued by the press ,and vilified by the public and how fair was it that when the convicted were named , their families would also suffer, being unable to escape the stigma.

Flipping heck, surely there must be something similar in the news somewhere?? Help folks -please let me know if you hear anything ,before I write my brain off !!!

I heard this on the radio today, I think if you got to bbc iplayer then you might be able to listen as well

I thought the case was well presented on both sides

I refuse to discuss this on the grounds people start with if it a serious case........

Radio Merseyside

Where do you draw the line?

Nomad

Hi Venice--yes it was on the radio today. The wife of a guy murdered in warrington several years ago said she didnt want her husbands murderers named (they were youth). Personally couldnt care less as long as they do their punishment.Cant see how it can serve any purpose. Just because you know the name doesnt mean you know who they are.

Oh, mucho thanks Nomad and fish - Id begun to think I was imagining things . To me, it seems a stupid idea.