Tribute to other children who like Baby Peter were gone too soon

Publisher's Note: This blog was first created to honour the memory of Peter Connelly [Baby Peter] while in the midst of a large media coverage on the terrible tragedy. Through the passage of time and while researching the subject of child abuse, abundant information was found plus details on specific cases where the victim's death was the result of brutal physical abuse. There were several cases found but only few are famous while many others are not even known as a result of the media's deliberate lack of exposure. Our search for information was partly motivated by a keen desire to know why the judicial system through its representatives is so disproportional in leniency towards the criminal perpetrators of horrific crimes against innocent children. The findings were stunning.  Our opinion is that judges, prosecutors, parole officers, psychiatrists, and the rest of flunkies that make up the entire judicial system, don't necessarily act according to laws when making decisions on shocking cases of extreme gravity; their premeditated decisions obey rather to influential external elements whose interests are outside the scope of anything related to justice, or the strict applicability of laws based on the hard facts of a particular case. The "external elements" are the elite controllers of society --mostly Jews-- who trace the lines according to their own class interest that all government functionaries must follow obediently in any official decision making process. The traces are hidden from the public for if they knew them explanations and answers would surface on the irrational, illogical, and nonsensical decisions made by judges in total contradiction with common sense and/or intelligence in cases where the hard facts and evidence overwhelm all arguments. The public is only allowed to know the official legitimized decision but not the true reason for the incomprehensible inconsistency between the case and reality. The case that fits into this description of judicial aberration with precision in view of the fanatical official exaggeration to protect criminals with privileges, despite the extremely grisly and gruesome nature of the case, is the one related to James Bulger. That case and few others are famous while many others are not. The cases below show consistent official pattern to protect the interest of criminals and the provision of leniency which amount to mere reprimands disproportionably with the monstrosity of the crimes.

Sarah Payne

Sarah Evelyn Isobel Payne [1991-2000] was eight years old when she was kidnapped, raped and murdered by convicted thief and paedophile Roy Whiting. Her tragic death became a high profile murder case in the contemporary criminal history of the United Kingdom. Sarah Payne disappeared on July 1, 2000 from an area near by her grandparent's home in West Sussex where she had been playing with her older brother and sister.

A nationwide search for her was commenced and her parents made television appeals for her safe return. On July 17, 2000 her naked body was found in a field fifteen miles from where she had disappeared two weeks earlier. The following day a forensic science test confirmed that it was in fact Sarah Payne and a murder investigation began.  She was suffocated to death and her body dumped in the field after being raped. 

Roy William Whiting was questioned about the disappearance and death of Sarah Payne as he was in the sex offenders register with a paedophile background and previous child rapist convictions. On December 12, 2001 he was convicted of the abduction, rape and murder of Sarah Payne and sentenced to life in prison. The case is particularly notable for the extensive use of forensic sciences in establishing the prosecution case against Whiting and his conviction for the sick and heinous crime he committed against an innocent little girl. 

On November 24, 2002 home secretary David Blunkett made a landmark ruling ordering Roy Whiting to serve a minimum of 50 years in prison which would make him ineligible for parole until 2051 when he would be 92 years old. Shortly after the ruling was made, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in favour of Anthony Anderson, another convicted murderer, who was challenging the right of politicians to decide how long a murderer must spend in prison before being considered for parole.  Meanwhile, in June 2004 it was confirmed that Roy Whiting would be applying to the Court of Appeals for a new minimum term to be set arguing that David Blunkett's ruling was "disproportionate," and on June 9, 2010 his appeal resulted in his 50-year prison term being reduced ten years in a decision by a High Court judge. He is now serving a 40-year minimum term which will keep him in prison until at least 2041 at age 82.  However, the murderer of Sarah Payne could be let out even earlier if he is moved from a maximum security prison to an open one before his release date.  Critics of the "justice" system estimate that "loopholes" in the judicial system will eventually be used to let him walk the streets again while knowing that Whiting is very likely to commit additional crimes against children. His appeal and trial is estimated to have cost taxpayers 500 thousand pounds compared to the 11 thousand "compensation" given to the parents of Sarah Payne by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.  Is this how much the life of an innocent little girl is worth to the "justice" system?  Roy William Whiting is a two-leg sick animal and monster who should NEVER again be let out of prison alive no matter how old he may be. He must die where he is but if for any reason he is let out of prison alive we the people have the right to do Our Own Justice to protect our children from him.  If released from prison he will murder another little girl again.

It is clear that the administrators of this nonsense judicial system deliberately fail to protect society from animals like Roy Whiting in order to comply with directives created by those in control to whom they are subordinated.  Roy Whiting forfeited his right to live --except in an isolated prison cell for the rest of his natural life-- when he raped and murder an innocent little girl and must pay according to his crime, even if death isn't enough punishment for him. Whiting manipulates the farcical judicial system from prison knowing that it can be used to his advantage in helping him get out to continuing perpetrating horrific crimes against innocent children.  

James Bulger

James Patrick Bulger [March 16, 1990 to February 12, 1993] was a two-year old British boy who was abducted, tortured and murdered by Jon Venables and Robert Thomson both age 10 at the time in Liverpool, England.

On February 12, 1993 Mrs. Denis Bulger [now Fergus] and her son James were at a shopping centre in Liverpool where Jon Venables and Robert Thompson who were both age 10 at the time, abducted James Bulger and took him to a railway line where they tortured and hit him with an iron bar on the head until his skull was fractured in ten different parts.  He was also sexually abused and blue paint was thrown on his face. After murdering James Bulger the two boys laid his mutilated body on the railway tracks and the corpse was cut in half by a passing train. The remains of James Bulger were found on February 14, 1993. Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were subsequently arrested and convicted of his murder on November 24, 1993 and sentenced to "custody" due to their age until their release in 2001 with full official protection, economic assistance, and new identity. Robert Thompson became a fag and now lives somewhere in Northern England with his lover.

This case dramatically shows the grotesque and repugnant official commitment to protect criminals who perpetrate extremely gruesome crimes against innocent children, for no other reason than evil and perversion or both combined. The extent of official complacency of their own policy to protect criminal savagery in this case, has numbed the mind in any endeavour to shed understanding on the irrationality of continuously refusing to impose the appropriate punishment according to the nature and facts of the case. Instead, officials are only interested in protecting the criminals by hiding their identities and making efforts to keep them out of prison, particularly in the case of murderer Jon Venables.

This paedophile and perverted murderer of James Bulger has received not only an excessive amount of leniency despite the monstrosity of his crime, but also a favourable treatment while in prison, personal protection, material help, and even official compassion as a reward for his horrendous crime. Maggie Atkinson, a former commissioner, described the savage murder of James Bulger only as "exceptionally unpleasant" and declared on more than one occasion that "it was wrong to triad the boys in adult court."  Where else could these savage killers have been tried at?  They committed a horrible and premeditated crime of murder regardless of their age at the time and should have been treated and punished accordingly instead of giving them consideration and leniency. And to add even more insult to the memory of James Bugler and additional pain to his family, former High Court official Baroness Butler-Sloss who gladly granted lifelong anonymity to killer Jon Venables, said during an interview with the Daily Mail that "the public should be more merciful to child killers."  [See the Daily Mail of March 15, 2010]  What precisely is she telling us?  You must be able to read between the lines of her nonsense statement. Will you be "merciful" to someone who savagely murders your son or daughter?  What she is telling us between the lines is that society should accept the crime of murdering innocent children as "normal." 

The disproportionate official fanfare when in 2001 the killers of James Bulger were released from jail after serving  only eight short years for a crime worthy of imposing no less than a life sentence without parole in normal prison conditions --and not with any special privileges as in the case of these killers-- was recently shattered by the arrest and conviction of Jon Venebles after his own guilty plea to paedophile-related charges which involved copying hard core child pornography from Internet sources.  This additional episode in the life of this pathetic criminal exposes even more than before the true nature of his deranged psychical condition, in reminisce to the sexual aspect of James Bulger murder as his corpse was found naked, a fact suggesting foul play before his tragic death.  It is also an indication that Jon Venebles is a paedophile pervert with homosexual proclivities considering that the pornographic material he was in possession of involved only young boys. For this additional crime and the breaching of parole conditions he received only two years not likely to be served entirely, as talks about giving him another chance to get out with a new false identity is gaining momentum, in a prelude to anticipate his release while the original crime remains unpunished and justice is denied to James Bulger as the victim and his grieving family, particularly his mother, Mrs. Denise Fergus.

The killers of James Bulger have no future other than face the consequences of their own criminal actions soon or later at a time and place dictated by objective reality. The nature of the case and what has been done to deny the truth and justice, run against all principles established by the natural order created to regulate human existence and conduct. This has nothing to do with laws or judicial decisions made by anyone.  Regardless of what officials do to protect the killers of James Bulger, in particular Jon Venebles, they will not be able to prevent what will happen one day as a matter of natural course. The killers of James Bulger should be either in prison for the rest of their lives or death.


The above cases became famously known in a multitude of others too numerous to mention here that weren't even given proper exposure but deserve full consideration as well, as they are additional proof that defending and protecting the interest of criminals, is the priority of officials who manage the current judicial system on behalf of those to whom they are obediently subordinated. There is simply no other logical way to explain the absolute nonsense the present judicial system truly is and where the root of its current existing form can be found.  Nothing happens without somebody planning and designing the course of something to produce an effect according to an original plan, and in the case of hard-core criminals getting benefits, protection, consideration, compassion, and even forgiveness for their monstrous crimes against innocent children, there is no exception. The people who were chosen to implement the policies traced by those who allowed them to be where they are on condition that they do as were told, are the culprit to point the finger at for what is currently happening in society now. They are acting on behalf of those to whom they are subordinated to protect their interest and not the interest of innocent children and decent citizens. This is why things are the way they are and nothing works. So within the context of this reality, common people have the absolute right to do whatever they must to protect themselves and their families against the criminals this system is protecting. Hence, the logical approach to this situation is to first seek unity among common people, organize, and act according to objective reality always keeping in mind that whatever is done it will be to do Our Own Justice, since we can not believe nor depend on this system at all. All murderers of innocent children must stay in prison until death or be executed if released.  Our mailing address is: