JAMES BULGER’S MOTHER SPEAKS OF “OVERWHELMING RELIEF” AS SON’S 𝘬iᩚller JON VENABLES IS DENIED PAROLE — BUT HER FIGHT IS FAR FROM OVER

More than 33 years after losing her two-year-old son in one of Britain’s most heartbreaking murder cases, Denise Fergus has finally received news she desperately wanted to hear: Jon Venables will remain behind bars. But while the decision has brought enormous relief, the mother says the repeated parole process continues to reopen wounds her family has never been able to escape.

The mother of m𝑢rdєred toddler James Bulger has spoken of her overwhelming relief after a Parole Board panel decided that one of her son’s killers, Jon Venables, should not be released from prison.

Venables, now 44, appeared before a parole panel during a private hearing as part of his latest review.

In a surprising development, he reportedly told the panel at the beginning of the proceedings that he was not seeking release, acknowledging that he still had further work to complete while in custody.

The panel ultimately concluded that it was not satisfied he was suitable for release.

For Denise, the decision represents an important moment after years of anxiety about the possibility of encountering another parole announcement that could change her family’s life.

A spokesperson for Denise, Kym Morris, told Sky News:

“Denise’s overwhelming feeling today is relief.

“This is the decision she has desperately waited for and she welcomes the Parole Board’s decision that Jon Venables must remain in prison.”

However, the relief comes with a painful reminder that the family’s struggle is not necessarily over.

THE LITTLE BOY WHO NEVER CAME HOME

On February 12, 1993, two-year-old James Bulger disappeared while shopping with his mother, Denise Fergus, at the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle, Merseyside.

For a mother, losing sight of a toddler for even a few seconds can be terrifying.

But Denise could never have imagined the horror that would follow.

James had been led away from the shopping centre by two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.

The pair abducted the little boy and took him on a journey through Liverpool before subjecting him to a brutal attack.

James’s body was discovered two days later on a railway line.

The murder shocked Britain and became one of the most widely remembered child murder cases in the country’s history.

Venables and Thompson were convicted of James’s murder and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty’s Pleasure.

They were released on licence in June 2001, aged 18, under new identities.

For Denise and James’s family, however, the nightmare did not end with their release.

WHY JON VENABLES WAS SENT BACK TO PRISON

Following his release, Venables was recalled to prison on multiple occasions after committing further offences involving indecent images of children.

In February 2010, he was returned to custody after such images were discovered on his computer.

He was subsequently released again in August 2013.

However, in November 2017, he was recalled to prison once more after further offending involving indecent images of children.

In February 2018, Venables 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.

He has remained in custody since that time.

An earlier parole review in 2023 also resulted in a decision that he should not be released.

For Denise, each new review has brought back the memories of losing her little boy and the uncertainty surrounding whether one of his killers might eventually return to the community.

WHAT HAPPENED AT THE LATEST PAROLE HEARING?

The latest parole review took place privately.

According to the published summary of the panel’s findings, Venables submitted an opening statement explaining that he accepted the need to undertake further offending-related work in prison and was therefore not seeking release.

The panel considered extensive evidence, including reports from prison and community probation officers, three psychologists and a psychiatrist.

A victim personal statement was also considered, clearly conveying the devastating impact of the original crime and Venables’ subsequent offending.

Although professionals assessed his expressions of remorse as genuine and sincere, significant concerns remained.

The panel identified questions about how effectively he would work with probation staff if released and whether he would be sufficiently open and honest during supervision.

It also concluded that further work was needed in custody to address his 𝘴єxual interests.

The decision summary highlighted concerns about the possibility of further offending involving indecent images of children and the potential progression to offences involving direct contact with children.

Ultimately, the panel concluded that Venables was not suitable for release.

He will therefore remain in prison.

DENISE WANTED THE HEARING TO BE PUBLIC

One of the most difficult aspects of the latest proceedings for Denise was the decision to hold the hearing behind closed doors.

Denise and her family had sought a public hearing, believing that greater transparency would help them understand the decision-making process and allow the public to see how parole decisions were reached.

They also believed that a public hearing would give the family an opportunity to feel that their voices had finally been heard.

However, the Parole Board rejected the application.

The Board explained that allowing the hearing to take place publicly could create serious difficulties for Venables when giving evidence, including concerns that people seeking information about his identity might use it to harm him.

The decision meant Denise and her family could not attend and observe the proceedings in the way they had hoped.

For a family that has spent decades dealing with the consequences of the murder, the lack of public access was another source of frustration.

THE FAMILY WANTS CHANGES TO THE PAROLE SYSTEM

Although Denise welcomed the latest decision, her spokesperson made clear that the family believes the current system places an enormous emotional burden on relatives of victims.

The prospect of Venables being considered for release again has caused Denise considerable anxiety.

Her concerns also extend beyond her own family to the safety of other children.

The family is now calling for changes to the parole process for prisoners serving life sentences.

They want longer intervals between reviews where legally possible, stronger support for bereaved families and greater protection from the cumulative emotional trauma of repeated proceedings.

They also hope to meet Justice Secretary Alex Norris to discuss these proposals.

The family’s message is that victims’ relatives should not have to repeatedly relive the worst experience of their lives without meaningful consideration of the psychological impact.

A spokesperson explained that although Denise can breathe a little easier following the decision, the knowledge that another review will eventually take place means the distress has not disappeared.

The next review is expected to take place in around two years, although an exact date has not yet been announced.

A MOTHER’S RELIEF, BUT A PAIN THAT NEVER DISAPPEARS

For more than three decades, Denise Fergus has continued to speak publicly about James, keeping his memory alive and campaigning for changes to the justice system.

The latest decision gives her a period of reassurance.

But no parole ruling can undo what happened on that February day in 1993.

James was only two years old. He should have had a lifetime of birthdays, first days at school, family celebrations and ordinary childhood memories ahead of him.

Instead, his mother has spent more than 33 years living with an absence that can never be filled.

The decision means Venables will remain behind bars for now, but it does not bring an end to the family’s concerns about future reviews.

For Denise, the relief is real — but so is the exhaustion of having to face the same painful questions again and again.

“Today, Denise can breathe a little easier. But she and James’s family deserve more than temporary relief before the next ordeal begins.”

James Bulger’s name remains etched in Britain’s memory, and his mother’s determination to ensure that he is never forgotten has not faded.

More than three decades later, she continues to fight — not only for her son, but also for the voices and wellbeing of families who have endured similar tragedies.

Rest in peace, little James. You will never be forgotten. 🕊️