(no title)

Bulger game taken off shelves

Lee GlendinningWednesday June 20, 2007The Guardian

A computer game which uses the CCTV image of James Bulger being led away to his death from a Merseyside shopping centre has been withdrawn from sale in the UK after being condemned by his mother as “sick and hurtful”. Read rest of the article here.

I do not understand how this sort of thing happens, and Legacy Interactive (the game’s developer) doesn’t seem to be offering a full explanation (to the public, anyway). What they have said is this:

“The image was included in the game years ago and without any knowledge of the
crime, which occurred in the UK and was minimally publicised in the United
States.”

While I suppose I can accept that, I tend to disagree that the case was not highly publicized in the United States. I was only 12 at the time and remember it VERY well (when I mentioned it, my husband remembered it as well). Although, I know I cannot expect everyone to recall the incident 10 years after it happened (the game was released in 2003), I can expect for someone who is developing a game about crime to be extra sensitive when pulling images (probably from the internet) to be used in the game. It is baffling to me that a CCTV image about a crime ended up in a CRIME GAME without ANY knowledge of what the image actually was. Seems just a little too convenient, if you know what I mean. But Legacy Interactive has agreed to remove the image in all subsequent versions and there is a downloadable patch for games already purchased. All copies of the game have been pulled from the shelves in Britain.

Once again, however, the real victims here are (wait for it)…the actual victim’s family. Poor Denise Fergus, James’s mother. This woman has been through the ringer more than a wine stained toga, and now 13 years after her son’s murder, she is still fighting for respect of his memory. He would be older now (at 14) then his killers were when they murdered him. Maybe that is the problem here. James was almost three years old at the time of his death. When the story broke we seemed to know painfully little about the actual victim. Older victims have had so much life to share. (Think of Laci Peterson’s endless photographs and videos.) We can learn about them, through their likes and dislikes, how they spent their time, how they grew up. With James, there was a blank slate in front of us (for the most part). I am not suggesting that he had no personality, or was not his own person, but we found out very little about him.

Today’s world is more connected than 1993, and when news broke of the killer’s ages (both 10 at the time) it seemed to overshadow everything else. Yes, it was unfathomable, yes, it was shocking, but James should have remained the primary focus. His family should have been protected at all costs. James seemed to become everyone’s child. Many dubbed the case as “every parent’s worst nightmare”. While this undoubtedly IS every parent’s worst nightmare, we have to remember that in this case, it was a nightmare come true for Denise Fergus and her husband (at the time) Ralph Bulger. James was not everyone’s child. James had a mother and a father. If he had lived for 10 more months he would have become a big brother. I find it interesting, that everyone felt the need to protect James, but not to protect his family. (Do some reading on the case and you will see how terribly the system has failed them.)

The media constantly referred to James as “Jamie”. “Little Jamie Bulger” was written daily in any number of accounts of the murder and subsequent trial. However, family had said countless times that James was not called “Jamie,” he was called “James”. I find it disrespectful to write about this child in endearments that we created for him. He was not our child to endear. (His killers did not even know his name until after the fact. Even in some of their questioning sessions afterwards they referred to him as “baby,” “the baby,” or “that baby”). Denise is still fighting with the public about using her son for their own purposes. A spokesman for Denise Fergus said this on her behalf:

“It is something that she feels quite strongly about, that images of James
should not be used and abused in this way as if he is some kind of public
property. It is as if it dehumanizes James and it seems like his death enters
into some kind of myth or legend. To her it is very real and an ever-present
emotion that she lives with every day of her life.”

It speaks volumes to me that she is not asking for any money from Legacy Interactive. Anyway, those are my feelings on the subject. Along with the fact that I think the killers should still be in prison, and not compensated or protected in any way. But that is a blog for another time.

*NOTE: I thought long about posting a picture of James Bulger on this blog. I decided to go ahead since I do not feel it is being used disrespectfully.

Advertisement