JON VENABLES FACES NEW PAROLE HEARING AS JAMES BULGER’S MOTHER’S PUSH FOR TRANSPARENCY IS REJECTED

More than three decades after two-year-old James Bulger was abducted and killed, one of the men convicted over his death is facing another parole hearing — but the proceedings will remain private.

Jon Venables, now 44, is preparing for a new oral parole hearing more than two years after his previous bid for release was rejected.

The decision has renewed a long-running dispute over transparency, anonymity and the rights of James Bulger’s family.

James’s mother, Denise Fergus, had asked for the hearing to be held in public, arguing that greater transparency could help address misinformation surrounding the case and allow victims’ families to better understand how the parole system reaches its decisions.

The Parole Board has now rejected that request.

DENISE FERGUS WANTED THE HEARING OPEN

In her application, Denise and her husband, Stuart Fergus, argued that the case was exceptional because of the seriousness of the original offence, Venables’ later convictions and recalls to prison, and the continuing public interest surrounding his potential release.

They also said a public hearing could help explain how evidence, risk and release plans are assessed by the Parole Board.

The family argued that simply allowing victims to observe a private hearing would not provide the same level of transparency.

They said a public hearing would allow justice to be “done and seen to be done.”

But Sir John Saunders, deciding on behalf of the Parole Board, concluded that the high threshold required for a public hearing had not been met.

He said a public hearing could make it extremely difficult for Venables to give his best evidence because people seeking information about his whereabouts could potentially be listening.

The board also considered the possible effect on prison and other professional witnesses.

HIS IDENTITY REMAINS PROTECTED

Venables has been subject to lifelong anonymity protections since his conviction.

Because he was only 10 years old when James was killed, his identity and details about his life after release have been protected by court orders.

The anonymity issue was one of the reasons his representatives argued against a public hearing.

They said it would be extremely difficult to conduct a meaningful public hearing without risking information being revealed that could compromise those protections.

That protection has remained a particularly painful issue for James’s family.

Denise has previously spoken publicly about the emotional impact of continuing uncertainty surrounding the man convicted of killing her son.

She has argued that a public hearing would allow her family to better understand what is being considered before any decision about Venables’ future is made.

VENABLES WAS 10 WHEN JAMES WAS KILLED

Venables and Robert Thompson were both 10 years old when they abducted James from a shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, in February 1993.

The two boys were subsequently convicted of James’s murder.

They were detained indefinitely and both were eventually released on licence in 2001.

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 following another offence involving indecent images of children.

His previous parole application was rejected in 2023 after the Parole Board concluded that his release would not provide sufficient protection for the public.

THIS IS NOT YET A DECISION ON RELEASE

The latest hearing does not mean Venables has been granted parole.

The upcoming oral hearing will examine his circumstances and whether the legal test for release is satisfied.

Parole panels consider evidence including behaviour in prison, previous offending, release plans and whether a prisoner presents an ongoing risk to the public.

The final decision has not yet been announced.

James’s family has therefore been left waiting once again for an outcome that could have profound consequences for them.

DENISE WILL STILL BE ABLE TO OBSERVE

Although the request for a public hearing was rejected, reforms introduced in England and Wales in April 2026 allow victims to attend private parole hearings in certain circumstances.

Denise Fergus has been granted permission to observe the proceedings.

That means she can hear the hearing, but the public will not be able to watch the proceedings as they would have done if the application for a public hearing had been successful.

The distinction is significant for the family, which had specifically argued that private observation was not an adequate substitute for public scrutiny.

A CASE THAT STILL RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT PAROLE

The Venables case remains unusual because of the combination of factors involved: a notorious child murder committed by two children, later offending after release, repeated recalls to custody, lifelong anonymity protections and continuing debate over how risk should be assessed.

The applications for a public hearing also came from representatives of James’s brothers, Jimmy and Ralph, as well as media organisations.

They argued that greater public scrutiny could improve understanding of how the parole system deals with such an exceptional case.

The Parole Board ultimately reached a different conclusion.

For now, the next chapter will take place behind closed doors.

Venables will have his opportunity to present evidence.

The Parole Board will assess the case.

And Denise Fergus — who has spent more than 33 years living with the consequences of her son’s death — will be able to listen.

But the wider public will not be allowed inside the hearing.

The question now is not whether Venables has already been granted freedom — he has not — but whether the latest parole review will result in another decision that changes the course of his life, and of the family’s long-running wait for answers.