Parole Board Rules Jon Venables Hearing Will Stay Private, Rejecting Denise Fergus's Plea

Jon Venables, one of the two men convicted of murdering two-year-old James Bulger in 1993, will have his next parole hearing conducted behind closed doors, the Parole Board has confirmed. The decision rejects a direct appeal from James's mother, Denise Fergus, who had argued that transparency was necessary to counter what she described as false information circulating about the case.

The 44-year-old's case will be reviewed at an oral hearing, marking more than two years since his previous parole application was turned down. That earlier bid, decided in 2023, concluded that Venables continued to represent a threat to children and might reoffend if released. The upcoming hearing will be his latest attempt to secure freedom after spending years in and out of custody.

Parole Board proceedings in England and Wales are ordinarily held in private, but the rules allow for them to be opened to the public when it is deemed to be in the interests of justice. Mrs Fergus had urged the board to make that exception, saying a public hearing would help correct misinformation that she said had caused her to relive her trauma. A number of media organisations also lodged applications seeking public access to the proceedings.

In explaining its ruling, the Parole Board said opening the hearing would create serious difficulties for Venables to testify. The panel concluded that he could be "being listened to by people who are seeking to get information so that they can kill him," according to the board's reasoning. That assessment weighed heavily against the arguments for transparency, and the request for a public hearing was turned down.

The background to the case is among the most notorious in modern British criminal history. James Bulger was abducted from a shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, in February 1993. He was tortured and killed by Venables and Robert Thompson, who were both ten years old at the time. The pair were jailed following a trial that drew intense national and international attention.

Venables was released on licence in July 2001, but his freedom did not last. In February 2010 he was recalled to prison after indecent images of children were discovered on his computer. He was freed again in August 2013, only to be sent back to custody in November 2017 for the same type of offence. Parole judges subsequently examined his case again in September 2020.

The most recent parole review concluded in December 2023, when the board rejected his bid and determined that he still posed a danger to children. That finding forms the backdrop to the current proceedings, which will determine whether he remains in prison or is released under licence conditions.

Victims of crime have been permitted to attend private parole hearings since reforms were introduced nationally in April. The changes were designed to increase public confidence in the justice system by giving victims and their families a direct role in the process. A spokeswoman for Mrs Fergus has said her application to observe the hearing was granted, meaning she will be able to follow the proceedings even though they will not be open to the wider public.

The decision highlights a long-running tension between the principle that parole reviews should protect the safety and privacy of those involved, and calls for greater openness in cases that have attracted enormous public attention. Parole Board officials have consistently argued that private hearings allow witnesses and offenders to speak candidly without fear of reprisal or exposure. Critics, meanwhile, contend that secrecy can foster suspicion and allow inaccurate accounts to flourish.

For Mrs Fergus, the outcome represents another disappointment in a decades-long campaign for accountability. She has repeatedly called for greater transparency around decisions affecting her son's killers, and her request in this instance was supported by several news outlets that argued the public interest justified an open hearing. The board's ruling means the substantive details of Venables's case will remain confidential, with only the final decision on his release likely to be made public.

Venables, now 44, has spent much of his adult life on licence or in custody. His repeated recalls to prison have centred on offences involving indecent images of children, and the Parole Board has previously found that he continues to present a risk. Whether the current review changes that assessment will be determined at the private hearing, the date of which has not been disclosed.

The case continues to generate strong emotions, in part because of the extreme youth of both the victim and the perpetrators at the time of the murder. James Bulger's killing prompted widespread debate about child offenders, the age of criminal responsibility, and the treatment of those released back into society under licence. Each development in the case, including parole decisions, tends to revive those debates.

The Parole Board's decision means the hearing will proceed without public or press access, though Mrs Fergus will be permitted to attend as a victim observer. A spokeswoman confirmed that arrangement, which was made possible under the April reforms. The board has not indicated when its final ruling on Venables's release will be delivered, but any outcome is likely to attract significant public scrutiny regardless of the private nature of the proceedings.