Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Venables and Thompson [1997] UKHL 25 is a UK constitutional law case, concerning the exercise of independent judgement in judicial review. Facts
On 12 February 1993 in Merseyside, England, two 10-year-old boys, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, abducted, tortured, and murdered a two-year-old boy, James Patrick Bulger (16 March 1990 [2] – 12 February 1993). [3] [4] Thompson and Venables led Bulger away from the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle, where Bulger was visiting shops with ...
The case was first heard by a Divisional Court, composed of Watkins LJ and Mann J. Mann, with Watkins concurring, rejected the Northumbria Police Authority's argument, saying that under the Royal Prerogative HM Government retained the right to do whatever "was necessary to meet either an actual or an apprehended threat to the peace", something that had not previously been recognised as a ...
Venables, now 40, was sent back to prison in 2010 and 2017 for possessing indecent images of children. But now the child killer has been informed that his case will be heard on Tuesday 14 and ...
The mother of murder victim James Bulger has “begged” the parole board overseeing the potential release of her son’s killer Jon Venables not to set him free as a hearing takes place this ...
According to a summary of the Parole Board’s latest decision, Venables had “accepted that he had a long-term sexual interest in children/indecent images of children”, despite taking part in ...
On sentencing, the act formally removes the role of the Home Secretary in sentencing of young people for grave crimes (such as murder) following the decisions by the House of Lords in R v Secretary of State for the Home Dept ex parte Venables and Thompson (1997) [5] and the subsequent case at the European Court of Human Rights, T. v United Kingdom.
The House of Lords held by a majority that Section 107 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 imposed a continuing duty on the Secretary of State to consider whether to bring the statutory scheme into force under Sections 108–117, and that he could not lawfully bind himself to not exercise the discretion that was conferred on him. The tariff scheme ...