JON VENABLES, 𝘬iᩚller OF TWO-YEAR-OLD JAMES BULGER, DENIED RELEASE AS FAMILY FEELS “OVERWHELMING RELIEF” – HE WILL REMAIN BEHIND BARS FOR AT LEAST TWO MORE YEARS

More than three decades after the horrific murder of two-year-old James Bulger, one of the men responsible, Jon Venables, has been refused release by the UK Parole Board. The decision has brought enormous relief to James’s mother, Denise Fergus, who has spent years fighting to ensure her son’s 𝘬iᩚller does not pose a danger to other children.

Jon Venables, now 44, will remain in prison after a Parole Board panel ruled that he was not suitable for release following his latest review.

The decision was announced on November 9, 2026, following a private parole hearing held last month.

However, details published after the decision revealed an important development: Venables himself told the panel that he was not seeking release at this stage, acknowledging that he needed to undertake further offending-related work while in custody.

The ruling means he will remain behind bars for at least another two years before becoming eligible for another review.

For James’s family, the decision has brought a profound sense of relief after years of anxiety surrounding the possibility that one of their son’s killers could be released.

THE HORRIFIC MURDER THAT SHOCKED BRITAIN

The case dates back to February 12, 1993, when two-year-old James Bulger was abducted from the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle, Merseyside, England.

James was shopping with his mother, Denise Fergus, when he disappeared.

CCTV footage captured the little boy being led away by two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.

The pair had taken James from the shopping centre while his mother was briefly distracted.

What followed became one of Britain’s most notorious child murder cases.

Venables and Thompson took the toddler on a journey through Liverpool before eventually reaching a railway line.

James was subjected to a horrific attack involving severe beatings with bricks and a metal bar. His body was later found on a railway line.

The discovery devastated his family and shocked the entire country.

Both boys were arrested and subsequently convicted of James’s murder at Preston Crown Court in November 1993.

They were sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure, the equivalent of a life sentence for children at the time.

RELEASED IN 2001 – BUT VENABLES RETURNED TO PRISON TWICE

Despite the seriousness of the crime, Venables and Thompson were released on licence in July 2001 after spending approximately eight years in custody.

Both were given new identities and lifelong anonymity protections because of their age and the threats they could face.

However, Venables’ subsequent history became a major concern for authorities.

In February 2010, he was recalled to prison after indecent images of children were discovered on his computer.

He was later released again in August 2013.

But in November 2017, Venables was arrested and returned to custody after further indecent images of children were discovered. He was also found to possess a manual containing material relating to child 𝘴єxual 𝘢bu𝘴e.

In February 2018, he pleaded guilty to offences involving the making of indecent images of children and possession of a paedophile manual.

He received a 40-month prison sentence.

Since then, his attempts to secure release have repeatedly been unsuccessful.

His case has continued to attract intense public attention because of concerns about the risk he could pose if allowed back into the community.

PAROLE BOARD REJECTS HIS LATEST RELEASE REVIEW

The latest parole hearing considered extensive evidence from professionals involved in assessing and supervising Venables.

The panel heard from probation officers working both in prison and in the community, three psychologists and a psychiatrist.

The evidence also included statements from James’s family, explaining the devastating and lasting impact of the murder.

According to the published summary, Venables submitted an opening statement explaining that he accepted the need to undertake further offending-related work in custody and was not seeking release.

He also expressed what the panel described as prolonged and extreme remorse for his crime. Professionals assessed his remorse as genuine and sincere.

However, the panel identified continuing concerns about his 𝘴єxual preoccupation and the potential risks associated with his behaviour.

The decision summary highlighted two particularly serious concerns:

• The possibility that Venables could return to viewing indecent images of children or child 𝘴єxual 𝘢bu𝘴e material.
• The risk that he could progress to offences involving direct contact with children, potentially causing serious harm.

The panel also raised concerns about how openly and honestly he would engage with probation officers if released into the community.

Although he had completed considerable work in prison to address his behaviour, the panel concluded that further intervention was necessary.

Ultimately, members were not satisfied that he was suitable for release.

JAMES’S MOTHER DENISE FERGUS WELCOMES THE DECISION

For Denise Fergus, the decision represents a moment of enormous relief after years of fear and uncertainty.

Denise has repeatedly spoken out against the possibility of Venables being released, warning about the potential danger he could pose to other children.

Following the announcement, her spokesperson, Kym Morris, told Sky News that Denise’s overwhelming feeling was relief.

She welcomed the decision that Venables must remain in prison, explaining that the prospect of his release had caused Denise enormous anxiety.

The family’s concerns, she said, extended beyond their own suffering to the safety of other children.

Although the ruling has brought some peace, Denise has also expressed frustration with a parole process that forces bereaved families to repeatedly revisit the most traumatic moments of their lives.

Her spokesperson said the relief did not remove the distress of knowing another parole review would eventually follow.

The family is now calling for changes to the parole system, including longer intervals between reviews where legally possible, stronger support and greater protection for victims’ families.

JAMES’S FATHER ALSO WELCOMES THE OUTCOME

James’s father, Ralph Bulger, has also been outspoken about the parole process.

Before the hearing, he strongly criticised the decision to hold the proceedings privately, arguing that the family deserved greater transparency and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

He had previously described the decision as deeply insulting to James’s memory.

The family had wanted the hearing to be held publicly, believing that greater transparency would help address misinformation and allow them to feel that their concerns were being taken seriously.

However, the Parole Board ruled that the hearing should remain private, citing security concerns surrounding Venables and his lifelong anonymity.

The family was also unable to watch the hearing through the separate video-link arrangement they had expected.

Instead, their written victim personal statements were read to the panel by officials.

WHY WAS THE HEARING HELD BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?

The decision to hold the hearing privately became another source of distress for James’s family.

Parole hearings in the UK are generally conducted in private, although public hearings can be permitted in certain circumstances when considered to be in the interests of justice.

The Parole Board argued that making this particular hearing public could make it extremely difficult for Venables to give evidence because of the potential threat to his safety.

Venables has lifelong anonymity protections and lives under a new identity following his release in 2001.

Despite the family’s disappointment, the panel proceeded with a private hearing and considered the evidence presented by specialists and officials.

ROBERT THOMPSON’S LIFE AFTER RELEASE

Robert Thompson, the other boy convicted alongside Venables for James’s murder, was also released in 2001.

Like Venables, Thompson was granted a new identity and lifelong anonymity protections.

He is not believed to have reoffended since his release.

The two men have followed very different paths since leaving custody, with Venables repeatedly returning to prison because of subsequent offences involving indecent images of children.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT FOR JON VENABLES?

Under the current arrangements, Venables will be eligible for another parole review in due course, with the next review date to be determined by the Ministry of Justice.

The latest decision does not mean that he will never be considered for release. It means that the Parole Board is not satisfied that the risks he presents can currently be safely managed in the community.

For Denise Fergus and the rest of James’s family, the decision offers temporary relief, but the prospect of another review means the emotional struggle is far from over.

More than 33 years have passed since James Bulger was taken from a shopping centre in February 1993.

His family continues to live with the consequences of a crime that devastated their lives.

And while the latest ruling ensures Jon Venables remains behind bars, James’s mother is also demanding a parole system that recognises the lasting trauma experienced by families who must repeatedly face the possibility of their loved ones’ killers being released.

For Denise, this decision brings a little more peace today. But the fight to protect James’s memory – and to ensure other families never suffer the same tᩚraɢedy – continues.