Naming shames?

IN NO way do I wish to defend the proven killer of Alesha MacPhail, nor do I have any sympathy for him.

But how can it be morally or legally defensible to print photographs and name this 16-year-old when other convicted killers’ identities are protected for life, not simply until they reach majority, at the expense of the public purse.

That protection is then enthusiastically defended at the public expense, for example the killers of James Bulger.

Is the public abhorrence not the same for both cases? Is the public fear and loathing not the same for both?

A little judicial consistency would be good. And do not tell me it is different legal systems – the moral principle does not change.

Walter Dickson

WHEN such evil crimes are committed, it is only right that the criminal is made known to the public – that goes for under-18s who think they are immune because of their age.

This crime has shocked the nation and even hardened criminals will be sick to think that anyone could carry out such a terrible crime on an innocent child.

Aaron Campbell will never have any peace of mind wherever he is placed. He deserves all and more and I will never have any sympathy for him, whatever happens. Tom Baxter, Denny, Stirlingshire