JON VENABLES FACES FRESH PAROLE BID AS JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY FIGHTS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING

More than three decades after the murder of two-year-old James Bulger, Jon Venables is facing another parole hearing — while James’s family is pushing for greater transparency over the process.

Venables was one of two 10-year-old boys convicted of abducting and murdering James in Merseyside in February 1993.

Now, more than 30 years later, his latest bid for release has reopened a painful chapter for James’s family.

The Parole Board confirmed that Venables is due to have his case considered at an oral hearing, following his previous parole application being rejected in 2023. At that time, the board concluded that he continued to pose a risk of further offending.

A FRESH CHAPTER IN THE PAROLE BATTLE

Venables was released on licence in 2001 after serving his sentence for James’s murder.

He was subsequently 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 another offence involving indecent images of children.

His parole position has been reviewed since then, with his 2023 application rejected.

The latest hearing therefore concerns not only the events of 1993, but also Venables’ conduct since his release from custody.

JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY WANTS THE HEARING OPENED

James’s mother, Denise Fergus, has been granted permission to observe the upcoming parole hearing.

But she and her husband, Stuart Fergus, have gone further by applying for the hearing itself to be held in public.

The Parole Board published the application in August 2026.

The family argues that the extraordinary history of the case, Venables’ later offending and the continuing public interest justify allowing greater scrutiny of the proceedings.

Representatives for James’s father, Ralph Bulger, and his family have also submitted a separate application seeking a public hearing.

Their application argues that the case raises wider questions about how the Parole Board assesses risk, considers evidence and manages the release of offenders in exceptional cases.

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT YET GUARANTEED

Despite the applications, the parole hearing has not automatically become public.

The Parole Board says private hearings remain the normal position because witnesses must be able to give evidence openly, particularly where highly personal or sensitive information is involved.

A public hearing can be ordered when the chair determines that doing so is in the interests of justice.

The board can also decide that some portions should remain private if sensitive evidence needs protection.

As of the latest published information, Venables’ application remains listed among the pending applications for public parole hearings.

THE ANONYMITY BATTLE

Another unusual aspect of the case is Venables’ lifelong anonymity.

Because he was a child when James was murdered, his identity has been protected by court orders and subsequent legal restrictions.

That anonymity has remained a deeply controversial issue surrounding the case, particularly following his later recalls to prison.

The applications for a public hearing argue that transparency could help the public understand how risk is assessed and how decisions about release are reached, while still allowing safeguards to protect confidential information and Venables’ anonymity.

THE 1993 MURDER THAT SHOCKED BRITAIN

James Bulger was just two years old when he disappeared from the New Strand shopping centre in Bootle on February 12, 1993.

Venables and Robert Thompson, both aged 10, were later identified as the boys who led James away.

James was subsequently found dead.

The case became one of the most closely followed criminal cases in modern British history, partly because of the ages of those responsible.

Both boys were eventually convicted of murder and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty’s pleasure.

ANOTHER PAROLE DECISION LOOMS

The latest hearing will determine whether Venables can be released under licence, based on the evidence and assessment of his current risk.

It is separate from the question of whether the hearing itself should be made public.

For James Bulger’s family, however, the two issues are closely connected.

After decades of recalls, parole applications and legal battles surrounding anonymity, they are now asking for a process that they believe the public should be able to understand.

For the moment, the outcome remains undecided.

Venables faces another parole review. James Bulger’s family is watching — and waiting to see whether the wall of secrecy around the hearing will finally be opened.