No abstract

Northern Ireland is in the early stages of transition from conflict, but progress is regularly affected by political and public discontent. A divided landscape, segregated and underresourced communities are enduring legacies of 'the Conflict'. 1 Yet the political will to tackle social and community division, consult with and support communities has been lacking.Grounded in six communities most affected by poverty and the Conflict this article illustrates the difficulties, tensions and contradictions experienced during transition and how, in the process of 'change', children and young people have been silenced, marginalised and demonised.

No abstract

In 1993 Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were found guilty of the abduction and murder of two‐year‐old James Bulger. Aged ten at the time of the offence, the children were tried in an adult court before a judge and jury amidst a blaze of publicity. They were named by the trial judge and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure [HMp]. The Home Secretary set a minimum tariff of fifteen years imprisonment. In December 1999 the European Court of Human Rights held that, in the conduct of the trial and the fixing of the tariff, the United Kingdom government was responsible for violating the European Convention on Human Rights. This article maps how the case became a watershed in youth justice procedure and practice influencing Labour’s proposals for reform and the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. Examining the progression of appeals through the domestic and European courts, it explores the dichotomous philosophies separating the United Kingdom and European approaches to the age of criminal responsibility, the prosecution and punishment of children, and the influence of political policy on judicial decisions. Finally, the ‘backlash’ against ‘threatening children’, the affirmation of adult power and knowledge, and the implications of the European judgments in the context of a rights‐based agenda are analysed.

In April 1989, ninety-six men, women and children, supporters of Liverpool Football Club, died in a severe crush at an FA Cup semi-final at hillsborough Stadium, Sheffield. hundreds were injured and thousands traumatised. Within hours, the causes and circumstances of the disaster were contested. While a judicial inquiry found serious institutional failures in the policing and management of the capacity crowd, no criminal prosecutions resulted, and the inquests returned 'accidental death' verdicts. Immediately, the authorities claimed that drunken, violent fans had caused the fatal crush. Denied legitimacy, survivors' accounts revealed a different story criticising the parlous state of the stadium, inadequate stewarding, negligent policing, failures in the emergency response and flawed processes of inquiry and investigation. Reflecting on two decades of research and contemporaneous interviews with bereaved families and survivors, this article contrasts the official discourse with those alternative accounts -the 'view from below'. It demonstrates the influence of powerful institutional interests on the inquiries and investigations. It maps the breakthrough to full documentary disclosure following the appointment of the hillsborough Independent Panel, its research and key findings published in September 2012. the campaigns by families and survivors were vindicated and the fans, including those who died, were Phil Scraton is Professor of Criminology in the Institute