“OVERWHELMING RELIEF”: JAMES BULGER’S MOTHER DENISE FERGUS SPEAKS OUT AS JON VENABLES IS DENIED RELEASE AGAIN

More than 33 years after the murder of her two-year-old son, Denise Fergus has welcomed the decision to keep Jon Venables behind bars. But her relief is overshadowed by the prospect of facing another painful parole review.

More than three decades after losing her little boy in one of Britain’s most notorious child murder cases, Denise Fergus has received news she had desperately hoped for.

Jon Venables, one of the two men convicted of murdering two-year-old James Bulger in 1993, will remain in prison after a Parole Board panel concluded that he was not suitable for release.

Speaking on Denise’s behalf, her spokeswoman Kym Morris described her immediate reaction as one of “overwhelming relief.”

The decision, announced on November 9, 2026, brings a temporary sense of reassurance to James’s family. But it also means they must continue living with the possibility that Venables could be considered for release again in the future.

A MOTHER’S RELIEF AFTER YEARS OF FEAR

For Denise, the possibility of Venables returning to the community has been a source of enormous anxiety.

Her spokeswoman said the decision was one she had been waiting for and that she was relieved Venables would not be released to potentially cause harm to another family.

The statement also highlighted that Denise’s concerns were not limited to her own family, but extended to the safety of other children.

However, the relief comes with a painful qualification.

According to Sky News, Venables is expected to become eligible for another parole review in around two years. Denise’s representatives said the prospect of going through the process again is deeply distressing.

They described the repeated reviews as a harrowing experience for a family that has already endured unimaginable loss.

WHY THE PAROLE BOARD REFUSED HIS RELEASE

Venables, now 44, had his latest parole review considered at a private oral hearing.

According to the published summary of the decision, he told the panel at the beginning of the hearing that he accepted he needed to undertake further offending-related work in custody and was not seeking release.

The panel nevertheless considered the evidence and concluded that it was not satisfied he was suitable to be released.

Its assessment included reports from prison and community probation officers, three psychologists and a psychiatrist.

The panel acknowledged that Venables had completed considerable work in prison to address his offending behaviour. However, it remained concerned about continuing issues involving his 𝘴єxual preoccupation.

In particular, the panel identified potential future risks involving further access to indecent images of children and the possibility of progression towards offences involving direct contact with children.

It also raised concerns about how effectively he would work with probation staff and whether the risks he presented could be safely managed outside prison.

The decision means Venables will remain behind bars while further work is considered necessary.

DENISE HAD WANTED THE HEARING TO BE PUBLIC

Before the latest review, Denise and her husband, Stuart Fergus, had asked for the parole hearing to be held in public.

They believed greater transparency could help the public understand the decision-making process and reduce misinformation surrounding the case.

Denise had also explained that the repeated speculation and uncertainty surrounding parole decisions had a retraumatising impact on her.

However, the Parole Board refused the application for a public hearing in September 2026.

It said a public hearing could make it very difficult for Venables to give evidence because of concerns that people seeking information about him might use it to harm him.

The decision was another disappointment for James’s family, who had hoped to feel more involved in a process that continues to affect their lives.

THE tᩚraɢedy THAT SHOCKED BRITAIN

James Bulger was just two years old when he was abducted from the Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle, Merseyside, on February 12, 1993.

His mother, Denise, had briefly lost sight of him while shopping.

Two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, led James away from the shopping centre. His body was discovered two days later beside a railway line.

The murder shocked Britain and prompted widespread public grief and debate about the treatment of children who commit serious crimes.

Both boys were convicted of James’s murder and sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure, the equivalent of a life sentence for children at the time.

They were released on licence in 2001, when they were 18, and given new identities.

But Venables was later returned to prison.

In 2010, he was recalled after indecent images of children were discovered on his computer. He was released again in 2013, but recalled in November 2017 after further offences involving indecent images of children.

He subsequently pleaded guilty to offences involving the making of indecent images and possession of a paedophile manual.

He has remained in custody since his latest recall.

THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER FOR JAMES’S FAMILY

The latest ruling does not erase the grief Denise and her family have carried for more than three decades.

Nor does it end the uncertainty surrounding future parole decisions.

Her representatives have called for changes to the parole process, arguing that bereaved families should receive stronger support and greater protection from the cumulative emotional impact of repeated reviews.

They also hope to discuss whether longer intervals between reviews could be considered where legally possible.

For Denise, the decision offers a moment to breathe a little easier. But the prospect of preparing for another review means the emotional burden is far from over.

James was only two years old when his life was taken. More than 33 years later, his mother continues to speak out, determined that his memory is never forgotten.

Today brings relief. But for Denise Fergus, the fight for peace and a greater voice in the parole process continues.