JON VENABLES FACES NEW PAROLE HEARING AS JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY PUSHES FOR PUBLIC SCRUTINY

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 the proceedings to be heard in public.

But despite claims circulating online, Venables himself has not launched the current application for a public hearing.

The application was submitted by James Bulger’s mother, Denise Fergus, and her partner Stuart Fergus. A separate application was also submitted by lawyers representing James’s father, Ralph Bulger, and his uncle Jimmy Bulger. Both applications ask the Parole Board to allow the upcoming hearing to take place publicly.

The Parole Board has not yet announced whether either application will be granted.

A NEW PAROLE BID

Venables, now 43, is due to have another parole hearing after a previous attempt to secure release was rejected in 2023.

He and Robert Thompson were both 10 when they abducted and murdered James Bulger in Merseyside in February 1993.

Venables was first released on licence in 2001. He was later recalled to prison in 2010 after being convicted of possessing indecent images of children.

He was released again in 2013 before being recalled for a second time in 2017 after another conviction involving indecent images of children.

His 2023 parole application was rejected after the panel concluded that releasing him at that point would not provide sufficient protection for the public. The panel also identified outstanding risks that needed to be addressed.

A further parole hearing is now expected, although the Parole Board has not publicly confirmed a hearing date.

JAMES BULGER’S FAMILY WANTS THE HEARING OPENED

Denise Fergus has spent years campaigning for greater transparency around decisions concerning her son’s killer.

In August, the Parole Board formally published the family’s application for a public hearing.

The application argues that the case has significant public interest and that an open hearing could help the public understand how parole decisions are made.

It also points to Venables’ later convictions as an adult, his previous recalls to custody and the complicated issues surrounding his anonymity and risk management.

The family argues that greater transparency could also help counter misinformation surrounding the case and reduce the uncertainty that has continued to affect them.

A separate application from representatives of Ralph and Jimmy Bulger makes similar arguments, saying that public observation would provide greater insight into how evidence, professional opinions, risk and release plans are examined by the parole panel.

HIS IDENTITY REMAINS PROTECTED

One of the most unusual aspects of the case is the lifelong anonymity protection surrounding Venables and Thompson.

Because they were children when James was murdered, a High Court injunction protects their identities. The order was originally introduced after their release and was later extended for life.

This means that although Venables is publicly known by the name he had as a child, publishing information that could reveal his current identity is prohibited.

The same legal protection applies to Thompson.

The anonymity order has remained a source of controversy, particularly among people who argue that the public should be able to know more about offenders who have subsequently been considered for release.

THE FAMILY HAS FACED PREVIOUS CLOSED HEARINGS

When Venables’ previous parole case was considered in 2023, the hearing was held privately.

The Parole Board rejected an application at that time for the hearing to be made public. The board said the general purpose of parole proceedings is to determine whether a prisoner’s risk can be safely managed in the community.

Under rules introduced in England and Wales, public parole hearings can now be considered where there are sufficient reasons to conclude that holding the hearing in public would be in the interests of justice.

However, privacy remains the normal position, and the decision to open a hearing is made by the Parole Board after considering representations from the parties and others.

THE DECISION HAS NOT YET BEEN MADE

The current application therefore does not mean that Venables’ parole hearing will automatically be public.

The Parole Board published the application in August and invited representations before deciding whether the case should be opened to the public.

Nor does the existence of another parole hearing mean that Venables has been granted release.

The board must assess whether his risk can be safely managed in the community before release can be directed.

For James Bulger’s family, however, the upcoming proceedings represent another painful chapter in a case that began more than 33 years ago.

The central question now is not simply whether Venables will eventually be released, but whether the parole process surrounding that decision will be opened to greater public scrutiny.

For the moment, that question remains unresolved.