I am not defending criminals, BUT
This "child`s" crime was terrible, just terrible. But he served his time, I am sure he had mental health counselling and is free to live his life and marry whomever he wants. He has a new life, new name, new town.
Unless there is compelling evidence that he would harm his wife(domestic assault) or harm another child or has harmed another child since his release, it is his choice to disclose his past or not.
There has been great pains taken to ensure his safety and privacy. What if the future wife goes to the press for real or imagined revenge.
There are some men who have extensive current and criminal pasts, and they marry a women with kids. One day suddenly she `disappears`and upon further disclosure his previous wife disappear just a few years earlier.
Or a women marries a man and knows about his past for violence against women and chooses to marry him anyway.
Or a rich husband, a great marriage, oh but when the time for Divorce comes he hires hit men to kill her to save money.
Or a seemingly mild manner fertilizer salesman who decides he wants the single life and kills his wife and unborn child.
The murder of Jamie was in 1993 and now it is 14 years later. Both the boys went from being 10 to being 24 and were released and there was no concern for public safety.
How would a person feel if they committed a `horrible`crime when they were mere children of 10, served their sentence, attempt to integrate into society, and then they have all of those efforts derailed by the disclosure of their past.
This women loves his man, I very much doubt that any disclosure will change that, he did not harm his own children, nor was he deemed to be a future risk to children. So I really do not feel it is in the interests of society nor the wife to know of a terrible crime when this now grown man was a child of 10.
