JON VENABLES FACES NEW PAROLE REVIEW AS JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY PUSHES FOR PUBLIC HEARING

James Bulger’s parents are seeking a public parole hearing for Jon Venables, more than three decades after their two-year-old son was abducted and killed. Venables remains protected by lifelong anonymity, while the Parole Board has yet to decide whether the upcoming hearing will be open to the public.

Jon Venables is facing another parole review, as the family of murdered toddler James Bulger continues its campaign for greater transparency over the process.

Venables and Robert Thompson were both 10 years old when they abducted two-year-old James from a shopping center in Bootle, Merseyside, on February 12, 1993.

The boys led James to a railway area, where he was killed.

The case became one of Britain’s most closely followed criminal cases, and Venables and Thompson were eventually detained indefinitely.

More than 30 years later, the case continues to affect James’ family, particularly his mother, Denise Fergus, who is now seeking to have Venables’ next parole hearing conducted in public.

Family asks for hearing to be made public

The Parole Board confirmed in August 2026 that it had received an application from Denise and her husband, Stuart Fergus, requesting that Venables’ parole hearing be held in public.

The application argues that the case is of significant public interest and that greater transparency could help the public understand how parole decisions are made.

The family also says public scrutiny could help address misinformation surrounding the case and give victims’ relatives a better understanding of the decision-making process.

According to the official Parole Board summary, the Ferguses argue that Venables should have to confront his offending through a public hearing, particularly because he later committed serious offenses as an adult.

A separate application was also submitted by legal representatives for Jimmy Bulger and Ralph Bulger, seeking a public hearing.

That application argues that the exceptional nature of the case, Venables’ later offending, repeated recalls to custody and the complex issues surrounding anonymity and risk management all contribute to a strong public interest in transparency.

Venables has been recalled to prison twice

Venables and Thompson were released on licence in 2001, after serving their youth sentences.

Thompson has not been publicly reported as having reoffended since his release.

Venables, however, was subsequently recalled to prison twice after being convicted of possessing indecent images of children.

He was first recalled in 2010 and was recalled again in 2017 after another conviction.

He has remained in custody since the second recall.

These later offenses are a significant part of the arguments being presented to the Parole Board as it considers whether the upcoming parole proceedings should be opened to public observation.

His identity remains protected

Despite being 43 years old, Venables remains subject to a lifetime anonymity order.

That protection means his current identity and identifying details cannot be lawfully published.

If a future parole hearing were made public, safeguards could still be used to protect his identity.

The Parole Board has previously explained that public hearings can include measures designed to protect sensitive information and the safety and privacy of those involved.

The issue of anonymity is particularly complicated in Venables’ case because of the extraordinary public attention surrounding the 1993 killing and his subsequent convictions.

A public hearing is not yet guaranteed

The latest application does not mean that Venables’ next parole hearing will automatically be public.

The Parole Board says most parole hearings are normally held in private. The Chair of the Parole Board decides whether an application for a public hearing should be granted.

A previous application to make Venables’ parole hearing public was rejected in October 2023.

The Parole Board stated at the time that the application had not been granted.

The 2026 application is therefore a new attempt to have greater public scrutiny of the parole process.

As of the latest official information, the application remains listed among the Parole Board’s pending public-hearing applications.

No decision on release has been announced

The public-hearing dispute should not be confused with a decision on whether Venables will actually be released.

A parole hearing is a process for assessing whether release can be safely managed in the community. The Parole Board considers evidence including the prisoner’s behavior, previous offenses, release plans and the risk of further offending.

There has been no announcement that Venables has been granted parole or that he will be released.

The immediate issue now is whether the public will be allowed to observe the upcoming proceedings.

For Denise Fergus and the wider Bulger family, the application represents another attempt to gain greater transparency in a case that has remained part of their lives for more than three decades.

The final decision on whether the hearing will be public rests with the Parole Board.