In a landmark decision that has brought a measure of long-awaited relief to a grieving family, the Parole Board for England and Wales has ruled to deny parole to Jon Venables, one of the two child killers responsible for the brutal 1993 murder of two-year-old James Bulger. The ruling, handed down following Venables’ latest bid for freedom in early 2026, marks a significant victory for Denise Fergus, James’s mother, who has spent over three decades campaigning tirelessly for justice and public safety.

Denise Fergus, speaking through her spokesperson, described the moment as one she “never believed she would see.” The court’s unexpected yet firm denial of parole has been hailed as the strongest step yet toward ensuring that the perpetrator of one of Britain’s most shocking crimes remains behind bars, protecting vulnerable children from further harm. This decision underscores the enduring trauma inflicted on the Bulger family and reaffirms the principle that rehabilitation must be proven beyond doubt—especially in cases involving repeated breaches of trust.

The Crime That Shocked a Nation

The murder of James Bulger remains one of the most harrowing cases in modern British criminal history. On February 12, 1993, in the New Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle, Merseyside, toddler James wandered away from his mother Denise while she was shopping. CCTV footage captured the heartbreaking moment when two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, took James by the hand and led him away.

What followed was a prolonged and horrific ordeal. Over the course of more than two miles, the boys subjected James to beatings and torture, including striking him with bricks, batteries, and an iron bar. They eventually left his body on a railway track near Walton, where it was later struck by a train—though forensic evidence confirmed he had already been killed by their actions.

The discovery of James’s body two days later plunged the UK into collective grief and outrage. The trial in November 1993 made history as the youngest defendants in modern British law to stand trial for murder. Both boys were convicted and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty’s pleasure, serving eight years before being released on licence in 2001 with new identities for lifelong protection.

While Robert Thompson has since lived a low-profile life with no known reoffending, Jon Venables’ path has been markedly different. Recalled to prison in 2010 for possessing indecent images of children, he was released again in 2013—only to be recalled in 2017 for the same offence. These repeated violations shattered any public faith in his rehabilitation and reignited calls for permanent incarceration.

The Long Road to Parole Hearings

Venables’ attempts at freedom have been fraught with controversy. In 2023, the Parole Board rejected his bid, stating explicitly that he still posed a “danger to children” and could reoffend. The panel cited ongoing issues with sexual preoccupation and a lack of sufficient progress in addressing his risk factors.

Despite this, the system required periodic reviews. In January 2026, the family was informed that Venables had been granted another oral hearing, scheduled for February. Denise Fergus was approved to attend and deliver a victim impact statement—the first time in over 30 years she would hear the voice of her son’s killer in such a setting. The prospect reopened “unimaginable trauma,” as her spokesperson Kym Morris described it, with fears the hearing could coincide near the anniversary of James’s death on February 12.

Ralph Bulger, James’s father, called the granting of the hearing a “kick in the guts,” vowing to attend and urge the board to keep Venables imprisoned. Public petitions and media campaigns intensified, with thousands signing calls to reform parole rules for serial offenders—particularly those who breach conditions involving child exploitation material.

The 2026 Ruling: A Turning Point

In a decision announced after the February hearing, the Parole Board concluded that Venables had not demonstrated sufficient change to warrant release. The panel determined that his risk to public safety—particularly to children—remained too high. Key factors included his history of reoffending, persistent psychological issues, and failure to fully engage with rehabilitation programs during incarceration.

This ruling has been described as “case closed” in the sense that it decisively halts Venables’ immediate path to freedom, providing Denise Fergus with a rare moment of vindication. “After 30 long years, Denise has finally witnessed a moment she never believed she would see,” supporters noted in statements echoing her relief. The decision is seen as a powerful affirmation for all parents who refuse to give up hope, reinforcing that justice systems can prioritize victim protection over offender rehabilitation when risks persist.

Experts point out that while the UK’s parole system emphasizes reform for juvenile offenders, repeated serious breaches like Venables’ create an exception. The ruling may influence future cases, prompting debates on automatic lifetime bans for certain violations or greater transparency in high-profile parole decisions.

Public Reaction and Lasting Impact

The news has sparked widespread relief and renewed discussion across the UK. On social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and Reddit, hashtags such as #JusticeForJames and #DeniseFergus trended, with users praising the Parole Board’s resolve. Comments ranged from “Finally, some real justice” to calls for legislative changes to prevent future releases in similar cases.

Media outlets, including the BBC, The Mirror, The Sun, and ITV, covered the ruling extensively, highlighting Denise Fergus’s enduring strength. Her foundation and advocacy work continue to support families affected by child abduction and murder, turning personal tragedy into a force for change.

The James Bulger case has long influenced British law and society—from debates on age of criminal responsibility (raised to 12 in some contexts) to restrictions on media reporting and public outrage over vigilante threats to released offenders. It remains a stark reminder of innocence lost and the lifelong scars borne by victims’ families.

For Denise Fergus, this denial of parole is not the end of her fight but a crucial milestone. “The hope has now been taken away—from him,” her spokesperson said, encapsulating the bittersweet victory. As the family marks another year without James, the ruling offers a glimmer of closure in an otherwise unending quest for justice.

In the words of many who have followed the case: after three decades of pain, a mother’s perseverance has prevailed. Jon Venables’ fate is sealed behind bars—for now, and perhaps for good.