Should Mary Bell be granted anonymity?

An injunction protecting the identities of child killer Mary Bell and her daughter expires next month when the daughter turns 18.

The order has been extended while Bell applies for a "perpetual injunction".

In 1968, the 11-year-old Mary Bell was given a life sentence for the manslaughter of two boys aged three and four. She was released with a new identity after serving 12 years in prison.

Bell was given police protection in 1998 after receiving payment for collaborating on a book about her life. Jack Straw commented that by co-operating with the book's author, Bell had herself to blame for the intense press scrutiny.

What do you think? Is it fair for Mary Bell and her family to remain protected for life?

This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

---

Your reaction

I think that every one is forgetting that she was only 11 years old when she committed these terrible crimes and was living in the most awful circumstances

Caroline, UK

I think that every one is forgetting that she was only 11 years old when she committed these terrible crimes and was living in the most awful circumstances. I don't think a day has gone by since where she hasn't regretted what she did and at 11 years old cannot be held fully responsible for her actions. After all many people, if they see a misbehaving child they immediately blame the parents for not bringing their child up properly or setting them a good example. What good would come of exposing her identity? enough lives have been ruined by this and I am sure she will forever live with the torment and regret of what she has done and despite what people think probably still does not live a normal everyday life due to the fear that hangs over her head.
Caroline, UK

It seems wrong for people to say she has done her time and paid for her crimes. On the other hand it is wrong for people to take the law into their own hands, but when the justice system appears to be failing the people I can understand the frustration this generates. The only people who have the right to decide whether she has paid for her crimes, is the family of the victims. No one here nor even the courts can truly feel what the families of the victims of these types of terrible crimes go through. They should be allowed to have more involvement in the process. I am sure they would find comments here that say `let her live her life in peace' extremely insulting, are their lives now (or ever going to be) in peace? I very much doubt it.
Darryl McCormack, Wales

This case is all about child abuse. Of course the injunction should be renewed. If it isn't, then the only result will be the abuse of Mary Bell's daughter by (a) the scum tabloid press in the name of "national interest", i.e. profits and (b) the spiteful element of our society as evidenced by the (thankfully) minority of contributors to this Talking Point, who cannot see the importance of breaking the cycle of abuse.
Jeff Fielder, UK

There is no getting away from the fact it was a hideous crime

Mel, UK

I have been reading the newspaper archives online so I could write an informed rather than totally emotional response here. Mary Bell murdered 2 small boys while merely a child herself. She was not even a teenager, and there is no getting away from the fact it was a hideous crime. She was sentenced to serve life and consequently served 12 years. She also collaborated on a book. What emerged as a result was that she suffered horrendous abuse at her mother's and men's hands. Now no matter what you think of Mary Bell she was not even a teenager. She was a small child and suffering appalling sexual abuse. This should happen to no child. When it does the country is up in arms. But not for Mary Bell. Not for one moment has she excused her actions. She has not manipulated her past to defend her actions. She now has lived her life quietly and she has a child of her own. Realistically the authorities will have been watching her very closely. Mary Bell lives with what she has done. Surely that combined with the punishment of years of sexual abuse and 12 years in prison is punishment enough?
Mel, UK

I think that maybe it's time we had faith in our "system". Mary Bell was imprisoned, much to the satisfaction of the British public, so why don't we continue to have faith? Is it right to show joy only when it suits us? Of course not. The British juridicial system is far better than most. We need to show them that we have faith! Let's face it, they rarely let us down. If experts deem Mary Bell ready to resume her life in freedom, who are we to argue?
Jane , Greece

Absolutely not. The bleeding hearts of this world are intruding more and more into the justice systems. Gaining "rights" for criminals. Of all of the bleeding hearts in this subject, none of them mention the victims or the victims' families who have been given a real and true life sentence, doled out to them by Bell, to grieve for their children for the rest of their lives. They grieve while Bell gets rich. What happened to our society when we allowed them to hijack the laws and reverse the old saying that 'Crime does not pay'? She should have remained in jail at least until the last of the grieving parents and siblings of the victims have died.
Peter, Toronto, Canada

In my opinion Ms Bell gave up her right to anonymity

David Bell, Brazil (UK originally)

Mary Bell supposedly has paid her debt to society. 12 years for 2 innocent lives. She was given anonymity, for herself and her daughter, but breached it for financial gain. I feel sorry for the daughter, because just as the 2 murdered children, she is an innocent party in all this. However her mother should have thought of that prior to accepting money for the story. In my opinion Ms Bell gave up her right to anonymity.
David Bell, Brazil (UK originally)

The protection of the innocent is far more important than the punishment of the guilty. 'Collateral damage' is simply not acceptable. Whether Mary Bell deserves protection or not is not the issue- her daughter is innocent and allowing her to live a normal life is more important than preserving 'justice', even if vigilante action could be so called.
William, UK

Mary Bell has forfeited her right to anonymity by working on a book about her crimes. She cannot have it both ways - either she lives privately, presumably attempting to forget the vile things she did, or she profits from the murders by writing about them. If she chooses the latter course, she must accept the publicity which goes with that.
Another Linda, UK

Yes in this case. Enough harm has already been done to Mary Bell and daughter.
Anna

Nothing can change the past

Niall, Edinburgh, UK

What's done is done. Nothing can change the past. I hope that the boys parents have accepted their loss and the court result of the time. However, hounding Mary Bell and/or her daughter now will gain nothing . I accept that 12 years is not long enough but people are forgetting her childhood. A cry for help in this case turned out to be very brutal and gruesome
Niall, Edinburgh, UK

Correct me if I am wrong, but it is not making any sense to me: Mary Bell is a murderer. She gets money for a book that tells about her murder. Sounds like a great way to make living! But it is not enough for British society. After having paid the murderer for the book about her honourable life and deeds, they protect her from public opinion that might not be in her favour (oh, poor Mary Bell!). I think it is total insanity!
Tamara, USA

Some of the ignorant comments on here show exactly why Bell should be left alone. If these weirdoes had their way we'd have vigilantism on the streets. And we've already seen too many innocent lives ruined by that.
Colin, UK

Why shouldn't she be able to live anonymously? She served her time. We have prisons to punish offenders, When they get out the debt is paid. We don't continue to punish them, or rather we shouldn't. Otherwise, do away with prisons and post criminals faces around town for the general public to punish, as that is what the obvious intention of revealing an ex-con's identity is - to continue the punishment.
A. Tater, USA

If Mary Bell is believed to be a serious risk to others, then publish her whereabouts.

John, England

I have no problem with publishing the identities of former offenders, but only if it is done responsibly (by the Government or Police, NOT by the Tabloids), and only if there is a strong argument that publication is in the public interest.
If Mary Bell is believed to be a serious risk to others, then publish her whereabouts. If she is not, it's probably best for all concerned if her identity were to remain secret.
John, England

Our justice system intends to deter, to reform and to protect the public for the period of the sentence. Mary Bell is no longer considered a danger, she has served her time and she has lived in the general community for 22 years without any re-offence. She is now a member of that public and as deserving of protection as anyone else. What possible benefit could there be in rendering her or her daughter vulnerable to the media now?
Kathy, UK

What is wrong with you people- I suppose you class yourself as Christians?

Bob, UK

What is wrong with some of you!! She was only 11 when she committed this crime - death penalty for 11 year olds - you are seriously sick. I cannot believe that a person is fully formed by age 11 and knows the responsibility of all their actions. To brand someone irredeemably evil when they committed these acts when she was a child - well words fail me. What is wrong with you people- I suppose you class yourself as Christians?
Bob, UK

I can't believe what I am seeing here: would anyone seriously recommend the death penalty for an 11 year old child? Her act was undoubtedly evil, but she was in the prison reform (note the reform) system and cared for by people presumably aiming to make her safe in society for all the years that we learn anything about anything. I am obviously not saying she deserves mass sympathy but if those who released her believe she is not a danger a human beings we have to give her a second chance and trust those in charge of her parole. She has to live with what she did for ever and ever, and so does her child.
Elise, UK

Chris of USA would have solved the problem by executing Mary Bell. Do they really have capital punishment for 11 year old girls in the USA?
Alex, Scotland

Chris, USA, I am absolutely appalled and disgusted! Are you seriously suggesting that 11 year old children should be executed? If so, I'd rather have Mary Bell as my neighbour than you - and, yes, I do have a young child.
Julie, UK

Chris, USA. How can you impose a death penalty on an abused 11 year old child? The crime was horrific, but surely at that age there might be some hope of rehabilitation. She has not been a treat for years, she has a daughter who deserves her full and loving attention, and so she should be kept anonymous. She has to raise her daughter, but live with the memory of what she did as an 11 year old, so she is still being punished anyway. Media attention will help neither her nor her daughter.
Ahmed, UK

Chris from the USA says Mary Bell's anonymity problem would have been solved if the UK had the death penalty. Do I infer that he would approve of executing someone for a crime they committed as an 11 yea old?
Edward Bagnall, Hong Kong

Her daughter is innocent as far as we know and should be protected. But I think one has to live with their mistakes and pay whatever consequence they earn. The public has every right to know who she is, for their own protection and the protection of children. Mary Bell's privacy problem would have been solved by the death penalty.
Chris, USA

I don't think Mary Bell should have anonymity. She is still a cold-blooded murderer, despite how long ago the crime was committed. About her daughter, Mary should have thought what could happen before she started breeding!!
Lorraine, Monaco

Sensationalist stories about her now would cause continuing anguish to the families of the children who were murdered

Stephen Trott, UK

I wonder how many of these comments have been made by people who have actually read Sereny's book about this case? Mary Bell, as a child, was herself the victim of appalling abuse by her mother and was completely failed by those who should have protected her. Had she been spared the unspeakable physical and psychological abuse that was inflicted upon her, the murders which she committed would never have taken place. For the tabloids to be permitted to indulge in sensationalist stories about her now would cause continuing anguish to the families of the children who were murdered in 1968; expose Bell's daughter to constant harassment and prurient reporting; and achieve nothing more than extra profits for our disgraceful tabloid media by satisfying the idle and judgemental curiosity of its readers. Let those who wish to punish Bell for ever read Sereny's book first and then consider what sort of people they might have been if they had grown up in Mary Bell's shoes.
Stephen Trott, UK

Bell is a child-killer. She will always be a child-killer. Nothing can change that - she robbed two children of their lives and their parents of their sons. She deserves to rot in hell.
Lisa, UK

Comments like "she should be hounded" sound like a throwback from the witch trials. I can just imagine some of the contributors here lining up with their torches, baying for blood. This capacity for violent revenge which they display by their comments shows exactly why she should keep her anonymous.
Deborah, UK

Who cares about Mary Bell, has everyone forgotten what she did to the two children she MURDERED..? I think the majority of the people out there need to stop thinking about "poor Mary Bell¿, and start thinking about the families that have been destroyed by this evil woman.
Sheldon Gatland, U.S.A.

We live in a country with a justice system that, while flawed, must be respected. Mary Bell must have her anonymity maintained if only to protect her daughter who has done no wrong. If, since her release, Bell has lived a law abiding life then I see no advantage from naming her and having a group of narrow minded, neanderthal, self style vigilantes dishing out their own form of "justice". Leave her alone and let her family live in the peace that they deserve.
Tina, UK

No one will gain from disclosing Mary Bells identity.

Chris, UK

No one will gain from disclosing Mary Bells identity. How can we believe in the rehabilitation of criminals on the one hand and then believe that they should be 'hounded' for their crimes once released. Let their identities remain anonymous, move on and let the papers find some other headline to increase sales.
Chris , UK

I think that every child has the right to be brought up within a secure family unit and one that is not subjected to public scrutiny, although having said that, I do not agree Ms Bell should be treated any differently to any other parent. Her child has the right to anonymity but Ms Bell committed a terrible crime and should have to suffer the consequences.
Nicola Curling , Tyne & Wear

I agree 12 years in not enough for the crime she committed, but the justice system set this as her punishment, which she has completed so this is not the issue in question. Does her daughter deserve to suffer for her mothers crime? I believe this would create yet another victim, and self reflection is also called for. If we could all be trusted not to take the law into our own hands then Mary Bell wouldn't need protection. Mary Bell will have to live her life knowing what she has done with the intense fear of what might happen if her identity is revealed.
Leanne, Wales

I do not believe that their identity should be kept a secret. What she did has no excuse, and she should not be protected. Same stands for the boys in the James Bulger case.
Toni Payne, United Kingdom

No, I do not believe that Ms Bell deserves anonymity. I think that, especially as she has worked on writing a book about her life she is wanting recognition. I can't believe that people will buy a book about somebody like this anyway!
Debbie Barton, UK

The only people to benefit from identifying her will be tabloid newspapers

Andy Pandini, UK

Having read Gitta Sereny's book about Mary Bell, I am in no doubt that she and her daughter should keep their anonymity. She has served the sentence for her crime, and has proved herself a worthy mother. The only people to benefit from identifying her will be the seedy editors of tabloid newspapers, who will attempt to demonise someone who should be left to live her life in peace.
Andy Pandini, UK

If she has been on the straight and narrow since she was released, I see little point in releasing her details. I am more interested in people who are likely to re-offend. As for collaborating in her story, the book would have been published regardless of her involvement so at least it contained the full facts and not someone else's ideas.
caron, england

Bell compromised her own anonymity in the first place

Guy Chapman, UK

It's a pity that the daughter can only be protected by giving Mary Bell anonymity. Since the daughter is innocent, the injunction must be extended; this seems wrong when Bell compromised her own anonymity in the first place. She should pay back the costs of protecting her identity.
Guy Chapman, UK

If we lived in a perfect world then Mary Bell would have no need to remain protected. But as we live in a world full of hate and violence then Mary Bell must be protected in order to protect the innocent: her daughter. Those that commit crimes like Mary Bell should be afforded anonymity until such a time that they commit another crime.
Katie Cunningham, UK

A "life" sentence of 12 years for killing children and then profit from it? She should be hounded.
Erwin Saxon, UK

I can't see any purpose in removing the anonymity that she's had for more than 20 years. Surely she's demonstrated in that time that she's no threat to anyone.
Dougal McKinnon, UK

She is as much a victim as the children she killed

W Andrews, England

In this case, there is a totally innocent person to consider. Mary Bell, as a small child, was branded as totally evil by the press at the time of her conviction. As we now know, she was and is as much a victim as the children she killed. The new name and whereabouts of this family must never become public knowledge. However, this does raise a separate issue. When young children commit crimes of extreme violence, shouldn't the reasons be fully investigated and detailed at the trial? If there is evidence that the violent behaviour is a reaction to someone's behaviour against the accused child, shouldn't that person also face prosecution? Mary Bell's tormentor directly caused a murder and the destruction of a number of lives but got away with it completely.
W Andrews, England

No. Whilst I feel sympathy for her particular case, there may be many other criminals who will then demand the same anonymity whilst not having any intention of behaving themselves for the rest of their life. Don't set a precedent with Mary Bell. She was convicted of a crime whether she likes it or not.
Barbara, UK

In cashing in on her own notoriety, she lost all right to anonymity. Jack Straw is right.
Alex Keenleyside, England

She has done her time and paid for her crime

Jo-anne Mulqueen, Brentwood, UK

Mary Bell should remain protected. She deserves to live her life like any other normal human. After all, she has done her time and paid for her crime.
Jo-anne Mulqueen, Brentwood, UK

Jo-anne Mulqueen has a funny view on justice, 12 years for killing two children! She should still be in prison, never mind should she have her identity protected by all these do-gooders. These sorts of people should have no rights. She should not be in the privileged position of having a choice.
Lesley, UK

Anyone that says that she has served her time is completely incorrect. Not only were her crimes horrific but she only served a minimum sentence for those awful offences. Why is it that criminals are protected more than victims?
Claire Francis, Scotland

I'm not sure if Mary Bell should be protected, but I do think that her family should be. They can't choose who to be related too, and it's not their fault Mary Bell is a killer. So why should suffer as well?
Damian, Scotland

Mary Bell is a citizen of this country and is entitled to be protected from possible vigilante action that would result from disclosing her identity. This is a civilised society; Mary Bell was sentenced in accordance with our laws and should be afforded the right to try and rebuild her life. Her daughter has committed no crime and should be protected at all costs. If we choose to live in a democratic country we must respect the course of law, justice and civil rights, even if that means swallowing a very bitter pill at times.
James Miller, uk

The public has a right to know who their neighbours are

Jennifer Johnston, Scotland

I think the public has a right to know who their neighbours are. Bell should never have been protected in the first place; it should really be the public that is protected from people like her.
Jennifer Johnston, Scotland

The above comment, that people need protecting from 'people like her' shows exactly why Bell and her daughter need anonymity. What she did was horrific; but she was 11 years old, she has paid for her crime and raised a daughter whose future should not be ruined by media and public attention. Let her alone to live out her life in peace. People can and do change; I am sure she knows, after twelve years in jail, the hideousness of her crime, and she will have to live with that forever.
Kate, UK

It's no longer about protecting Mary Bell herself, but her daughter. This girl has nothing to do with her mother's past and should be protected. It seems strange to want to cause misery to someone, whatever thay may have done in the past, when Mary Bell feels remorse for what she did as a child. I do not believe that she is considered a threat - she has raised her own child - so why cause further heartache to her and her family? Allow her to live in peace.
Anonymous , UK

No it isn't fair. She, together with Thompson and Venables should be exposed and left to face the consequences.
P, UK

Maybe P,UK would like us to dispense with the legal system altogether. It seems that the reports on the case suggest Mary Bell's actions were a consequence of her treatment as a child. In other words be grateful that your life didn't take a similar tragic path. This simplistic condemnation of people as "evil" is driven by puerile and lazy reporting and does nothing except create a society where tolerance and understanding is overwhelmed by a vigilantism and ignorance . Do we want to prevent similar incidents or are we only interested in revenge and retribution.
Leigh, USA (UK orig)

Yes definitely. The media cannot be trusted to behave responsibly and not hound this lady and her daughter for something a maladjusted child did over 30 years ago. This isn't to belittle the terrible crime that was committed. But sadly, far more atrocious and planned crimes on children are committed regularly by adults, who after their trial, imprisonment and release, are able to relax back into anonymity with few people being aware or even interested.
Helen, UK