The lawyer for one of two schoolboys accused of murdering toddler James Bulger put all the blame on the other youngster Monday. The attorney for the second child said his client did not mean to do it.
Brian Walsh said that his 11-year-old client, who confessed to killing James, was not "lily white or totally blameless" but that he did not intend to seriously harm the 2-year-old.David Turner, representing the other 11-year-old boy, told the jury his client should be absolved because he says he took no part in the brutal beating death of James on an isolated stretch of railway.
Twelve jurors are to begin deliberations Wednesday. Neither defense lawyers called any witnesses before presenting their final statements Monday.
The prosecution alleges the boys, who by court order may be identified in news reports only as Child A and Child B, set out to abduct and at least seriously hurt a child last Feb. 12. Both have pleaded innocent to abducting and murdering James and attempting to abduct another child the same day.
To convict, because of the boys' age, the jury must find that the defendants intended to harm James and knew what they were doing was seriously wrong.
Child B confessed to killing James. Child A said he only watched the child being battered with bricks and an iron bar, but insisted in 6 1/2 hours of police questioning, "I never killed him."
Child B "does not claim to be lily white or totally blameless. He says he did intend to cause some harm to James Bulger," Walsh argued.
"If that contention by (Child B) is right . . . then he cannot be guilty of the crime of murder, although he could be guilty of the serious offense of manslaughter."
Turner, defending Child A, said witnesses spoke of seeing his client commit only one hostile act against James during a 2 1/2-mile walk across the city to the railroad track. Other witnesses reported Child B played a dominant role, he said.