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

Jon Venables is facing another parole review more than three decades after the murder of two-year-old James Bulger — while James’s family is making a renewed legal push for greater transparency over the proceedings.

The latest development does not mean Venables has been granted release or that his parole hearing has already been opened to the public.

Instead, the Parole Board has received applications from Denise and Stuart Fergus, James Bulger’s mother and stepfather, and separately from James’s father Ralph Bulger and uncle Jimmy Bulger, asking for the forthcoming oral hearing to be held publicly.

FAMILY DEMANDS GREATER TRANSPARENCY

The Parole Board published details of the applications on August 7, 2026, confirming that both sets of relatives are seeking a public hearing.

The applications argue that the case has exceptional public interest because it involves the murder of a child by children, Venables’ subsequent offending as an adult, repeated recalls to custody and difficult questions surrounding anonymity, risk management and potential release.

The families also argue that allowing the public to observe the proceedings could provide a clearer understanding of how evidence, professional opinions and public-protection risks are assessed.

Denise Fergus has previously spoken publicly about the emotional toll of repeatedly having to participate in parole proceedings involving her son’s killer.

In January, she told ITV that she wanted authorities to take Venables’ later offending into account when considering any future release.

VENABLES’ IDENTITY REMAINS PROTECTED

Despite the calls for greater transparency, Venables’ identity remains protected by longstanding anonymity orders.

The restrictions were originally imposed because he and Robert Thompson were only 10 years old when they murdered James Bulger in Merseyside in 1993.

The anonymity protections mean that even if a hearing is made public, restrictions can still apply to information capable of identifying Venables or revealing his whereabouts.

A previous application to make Venables’ parole hearing public was rejected in October 2023 by the Chair of the Parole Board.

That earlier decision illustrates why the current applications are significant: the question is not simply whether the public can attend, but whether the necessary safeguards can protect confidential information and Venables’ anonymity while allowing greater scrutiny.

HIS PREVIOUS RELEASES AND RECALLS

Venables and Thompson were released on licence in 2001 after spending eight years in secure youth accommodation.

Venables was later recalled to prison in 2010 after indecent images of children were found on his computer.

He was released again in 2013 but was recalled for a second time in 2017 after being found in possession of further indecent images of children.

His most recent parole review in 2023 resulted in the Parole Board deciding that releasing him would not be safe for the protection of the public.

The panel raised concerns about his ability to be open and honest with professionals and identified continuing risks connected with his offending.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

The latest public-hearing applications are now before the Parole Board.

The official application documents show that the Fergus family and the Bulger family have proposed different arguments for greater transparency, including the possibility of safeguards such as reporting restrictions, private sessions and a hybrid hearing.

The applications themselves do not determine whether Venables will be released.

That decision will depend on the separate parole process and the evidence considered by the panel.

Under changes to the Parole Board Rules that came into force in 2026, there is now also a mechanism allowing certain release decisions involving serious offenders to be referred to the High Court for a further check.

For James Bulger’s family, however, the immediate issue is whether they will finally be able to see more of the process that has repeatedly affected their lives.

More than 30 years after James was murdered, the debate over Venables’ future remains intertwined with another question: how much transparency should be possible in a parole case involving a protected identity, repeated offending and the murder of a child?

For now, the Parole Board is considering the applications for a public hearing, while Venables’ anonymity remains legally protected.