DENISE FERGUS MAKES FRESH BID TO OPEN JON VENABLES’ PAROLE HEARING TO THE PUBLIC

More than 30 years after the murder of two-year-old James Bulger, his mother Denise Fergus is making another attempt to bring greater transparency to the parole process involving Jon Venables.

Fergus and her husband, Stuart, have applied for Venables’ forthcoming parole hearing to be held in public, arguing that the exceptional nature of the case and the continuing public interest justify greater scrutiny.

But there is an important point that should not be overlooked:

The hearing has not been approved for public access.

The Parole Board must consider the application and any representations before deciding whether the legal requirements for a public hearing have been met.

WHY DOES DENISE FERGUS WANT THE HEARING OPENED?

For Fergus, the issue goes beyond the question of whether Venables should eventually be released.

She has spent decades dealing with the consequences of James’ murder and has repeatedly called for greater transparency surrounding decisions about Venables’ future.

Her latest application is therefore another attempt to allow greater public scrutiny of a parole process that would normally take place privately.

WHY HAS VENABLES’ IDENTITY REMAINED PROTECTED?

Venables and Robert Thompson were both 10 years old when they were convicted of James Bulger’s murder in 1993.

Because they were children at the time of the offence, strict legal protections have surrounded their identities.

Venables continues to be protected by a lifelong anonymity injunction.

That means even if a public hearing were eventually approved, it would not automatically mean that his current identity, location or other protected information could be disclosed.

Measures could be used to protect legally restricted information during any public proceedings.

THIS IS NOT THE FIRST ATTEMPT

The issue of a public parole hearing has been raised before.

In 2023, an application for Venables’ parole hearing to be held publicly was rejected by the Parole Board.

The Board concluded that the circumstances at that time did not justify departing from the normal private process.

The current application is therefore a fresh request, not confirmation that the previous decision has been overturned.

VENABLES’ LATER OFFENDING

The renewed attention also comes against the background of Venables’ later offending.

After his release from custody, he was recalled to prison in 2010 after indecent images of children were discovered.

He was released again but was recalled for a second time in 2017 after further offending involving indecent images of children.

He has remained in prison since that second recall.

These matters form part of the background to the continuing debate over his future and any potential release.

 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

The Parole Board must now consider the application for a public hearing.

Venables and the other relevant parties have the opportunity to make representations.

If the application is granted, the Board would then need to determine how the hearing could be conducted while protecting legally restricted information.

If it is rejected, the parole process would continue under the usual private arrangements.

The application itself does not decide whether Venables will be released.

WHAT IS REALLY AT STAKE?

The debate is ultimately about two competing principles:

Transparency in a case of extraordinary public interest

versus

privacy, security and legally protected information surrounding an offender who was a child when the original crime occurred.

For Denise Fergus, the issue is deeply personal.

For the Parole Board, however, the question is a legal one: does the public interest and the interests of justice justify opening this particular hearing?

 DENISE FERGUS HAS MADE A FRESH APPLICATION.

THE PAROLE BOARD HAS NOT YET DECIDED WHETHER THE HEARING WILL BE PUBLIC.

VENABLES’ ANONYMITY REMAINS LEGALLY PROTECTED.

 HIS FUTURE WILL ULTIMATELY BE DECIDED THROUGH THE PAROLE PROCESS.

There is no confirmed “legal crisis” and no evidence that authorities are “terrified” of a public hearing.

What is confirmed is more straightforward — James Bulger’s mother wants the public to have a greater opportunity to see how the decision concerning Venables’ future is reached.

And now the Parole Board must decide whether that request meets the legal threshold.

Independent commentary based on publicly reported information and official material. Not affiliated with the Parole Board, police or government. Unverified claims are not presented as facts.