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

More than three decades after the murder of two-year-old James Bulger, the case of Jon Venables is once again heading toward a new parole review — reopening painful memories for James’s family.

Venables was only 10 years old when he and Robert Thompson abducted and murdered James in Merseyside in February 1993.

Now aged 43, Venables remains in prison and is facing another consideration of whether he can eventually be released.

But this time, James Bulger’s family is also seeking greater transparency around the parole process.

A NEW PAROLE REVIEW

Venables was previously refused parole in 2023.

The Parole Board said at the time that it was not satisfied his release would be safe for the protection of the public, citing outstanding risks and concerns identified in the evidence before the panel.

In January 2026, James’s mother, Denise Fergus, was informed that Venables would have another opportunity to argue his case.

A date for the new hearing has not yet been announced.

The upcoming review does not mean Venables will automatically be released.

The Parole Board’s task is to determine whether a prisoner’s risk can be safely managed in the community. It considers evidence about the prisoner’s conduct, progress, risk and proposed arrangements if release were to be granted.

JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY WANTS THE HEARING OPEN

In August 2026, the Parole Board confirmed that it had received an application from Denise and Stuart Fergus asking for Venables’ parole hearing to be held in public.

A separate application was submitted by representatives of Ralph and Jimmy Bulger, James’s father and brother.

The applications argue that the case has exceptional public interest because of the original murder, Venables’ later convictions for possessing indecent images of children, previous recalls to custody and the complicated issues surrounding anonymity and risk management.

The applicants also argue that a public hearing could help people better understand how parole decisions are made and reduce misinformation surrounding the case.

However, the request remains pending.

The Parole Board has not announced that the hearing will be made public.

A HISTORY OF RELEASE AND RECALL

Venables and Thompson were released on licence in 2001 after serving their minimum periods in custody.

Venables was subsequently recalled to prison in 2010 after being convicted of possessing indecent images of children.

He was released again in 2013 but was recalled for a second time in 2017 after another conviction relating to child abuse images.

His history of recalls has become an important part of the continuing debate surrounding any future release.

The 2023 Parole Board decision said the panel had concerns about continuing sexual preoccupation and possible future risks, including the risk of further offending involving child sexual abuse material or contact with children.

WHY THE HEARING CANNOT SIMPLY BE OPENED TO EVERYONE

There is another unusual legal issue surrounding the case.

Because Venables and Thompson were children when they committed the murder, their identities have been protected by a lifelong anonymity injunction.

The protection remains in place.

A previous application to make Venables’ parole hearing public was rejected in October 2023. The Parole Board’s chair said the hearing would remain private.

The latest application therefore proposes safeguards that could allow greater public scrutiny without removing the legal protections surrounding Venables’ identity.

The applicants have suggested mechanisms including private sessions for sensitive material and a possible hybrid arrangement.

DENISE FERGUS: “IT REOPENS THE TRAUMA”

For Denise Fergus, the possibility of another parole hearing comes with memories of the devastating events of 1993.

James was taken from his mother while she was shopping at the Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle on February 12, 1993.

Venables and Thompson were convicted of his murder after leading the toddler away from the shopping centre.

The case shocked Britain because of the extreme youth of the two offenders.

More than 30 years later, Fergus continues to campaign on issues surrounding her son’s case and the parole process.

She has argued that a public hearing could provide greater transparency and help address misinformation that she says has repeatedly caused distress to her family.

THE QUESTION NOW BEFORE THE PAROLE BOARD

There are currently two separate questions surrounding Venables’ case.

The first is whether his risk can be safely managed if he were eventually released.

The second is whether the parole hearing itself should be opened to public observation.

Neither question has been decided.

The Parole Board’s rules state that hearings normally take place in private, although public hearings can be allowed where the interests of justice justify such a departure.

The board must consider representations before making a decision on a public-hearing application.

THE FAMILY IS STILL WAITING

For James Bulger’s family, the latest development means another period of uncertainty.

A new parole review is expected, but no hearing date has yet been announced.

And before that process moves forward, the Parole Board must also decide whether the hearing can be made public.

For now, Venables remains in custody.

The lifelong anonymity order remains in force.

And more than 30 years after the murder of a two-year-old boy, James Bulger’s family continues to seek answers and greater transparency as another chapter in the case approaches.

The next decision will determine not only how the parole process proceeds, but whether the public will be allowed to see that process unfold.