Tonight:
5°c
Judge: Jon Venables in clear and present danger if new identity is revealed
Paul Cheston, Courts Correspondent30 Jul 2010
Jon Venables is in “clear and present danger” of being killed if his new name is made public, a High Court judge said today.
There is “compelling evidence” that he would be attacked in revenge for murdering two-year-old James Bulger, said Mr Justice Bean. He added that the courts had a duty to protect suspects and prisoners from harm — even “unpopular defendants” such as Venables.
The judge was explaining why he has decided Venables should continue to be protected at taxpayers' expense following his conviction for child pornography.
Venables was jailed at the Old Bailey on Friday after admitting downloading and distributing indecent images of children. After the sentence was imposed, Mr Justice Bean renewed a 2001 order that stops Venables's new identity, appearance and whereabouts being revealed.
It also bans the media from reporting where he is in jail and where he was at the time of his arrest In February, apart from the fact he had been living in Cheshire.
Today, in a 26-paragraph ruling, Mr Justice Bean rejected demands to lift Venables's anonymity. He said: “[There is] compelling evidence of a clear and present danger to his physical safety and indeed his life if these facts are made public.”
The judge accepted there was “an understandable and legitimate public interest in the fact that one of James Bulger's killers has now been convicted of child pornography.” But “there is no legitimate public interest in knowing his appearance, his location in custody, or the exact location at which he was arrested and to which he might return in the event of being released”.
Having faced the child porn charges under his real name, “there is no reason why his new name should be made public,” the judge said. “The effect of doing so would simply be to assist those who seek to track him down. The fact of the public interest is that the man formally known as Jon Venables has been convicted. His new name is entirely immaterial.”
The judge dismissed suggestions Venables is only been protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. “It is a fundamental duty of the state to ensure that suspects, defendants and prisoners are protected from violence and not subjected to retribution or punishment except in accordance with the sentence of the courts,” he said.
“That principle applies just as much to unpopular defendants as to anyone else.” Venables and Robert Thompson were 10 when they tortured and killed two-year-old James in Bootle, Merseyside. They were 11 when they were convicted and ordered to be detained at Her Majesty's pleasure. They were released under new identities in 2001.
Last week the Old Bailey heard that after his release Venables had been arrested on suspicion of affray but not charged, and cautioned for possessing cocaine. James's mother Denise Fergus has demanded an inquiry into the probation service's supervision of Venables.
Reader views (26)
If he's in danger, it's only because of his own actions and should face up the facts and deal with them on his own, without golden cover-up programmes WHICH I HAVE TO PAY FOR.
- Marco Marboni, Kettering, UK, 31/07/2010 19:10
Report abuse
Joe,London wrote:'This man was failed as a youngster by irresponsible adults (His Parents)'
My reply to that remark is, the World is not a perfect place to be born into...there are many children who have had unsuitable parents...but maybe they had unsuitable parents too. Whoever we are and however difficult our lives have been...We cannot accept it as an excuse for killing anyone... let alone a child. Jon Venables HAS been treated with kid gloves, with computers, guitars and other things while in prison. He was given a very fair chance to begin a meaningful life...he has proved he is not up to it. He is just a bad person and you have to accept that fact.
- Alan, Luzon Philippines, 31/07/2010 08:31
Report abuse
I would like to know why this 18 stone person is allowed to spend £40 a week of Tax payers money on junk sweets ? This is too much money to waste, no wonder the Jails are full.
- stan white, leeds uk, 31/07/2010 08:18
Report abuse
Maybe he should be sent to live next door to the judge who is protecting him but not the public. Like that would ever happen.
- Jerry, Seattle US, 31/07/2010 00:05
Report abuse
So what, Tough Sxxt, End of.
- Steve, Brentford, 30/07/2010 20:41
Report abuse
name and shame... like they do in BC, Canada. Any perverts released from half way houses/prison are named on the news and where they will be living. Why should they get protection when civilised human beings do not.
- Taz, Kelowna, Canada, 30/07/2010 19:42
Report abuse
Why should he be in any more danger than other peadophiles that are set free.I have not heard of anyone taking revenge on them.Yet this bloke could live next to a school and nobody would be told.
- David Smith, Croydon, 30/07/2010 16:30
Report abuse
I see the mob are baying for blood. Funny how the internet has revealed how thin our veneer of civilization really is.
- Arfur Towcrate, Staffycher, 30/07/2010 16:29
Report abuse
No one has answered the question
"do you remember what you did when you were 10"
This man was failed as a youngster by irresponsible adults (His Parents), he was failed by adults who were meant to transform him when he was jailed and yet all I can read here is people calling for his head. I wonder how many of us so called adults do realise our responsibilities as parents and or guardians. I have children and I will never let them out of my site if I am out of the house.(You should think about that)I am not supporting what he did to Little James but if I was the adult who was with him on the day I would have looked at myself and probably not continue to demand the worse for Vernables
- Joe, London, 30/07/2010 16:25
Report abuse
David Short, you are correct that I cannot remember everything I did when I was ten years old, but I certainly never murdered a two year old child. You mention that "We are totally different people at that age to the adults we become, as both Venables and Thompson have proved in their different ways." The whole point is that, as their identity is protected, we know absolutely nothing of the people they are. We only know a little about Venables now because he got caught. They spent approximately 8 years in a young offenders intitution yet Venables has proved that it failed to reform him, yet the taxpayer is still paying to keep him. He is an adult now. Any other adults found guilty of posessing child porn would not have their identities protected. As an adult, you should be mature enough to know that, if you break laws you face the consequences.
- MB, Kent, 30/07/2010 16:16
Report abuse
What we want is a fearless newspaper editor willing to ignore Judge Bean (shame he has not got his namesake Roy's values) and publish this wretch's details. Come on, you'll be out in no time.
- gwilym rhys-jones, marbella spain, 30/07/2010 15:53
Report abuse
MB, you are wrong. The terms under which they live include that they must reveal their true identity if they start a serious relationship. Robert Thompson did so with his same-sex partner.
Some of these comments are idiotic. What realistically is the 'system' meant to do with 10 year old serious offenders?
Can you remember anything much you did at 10? Most people can't. We are totally different people at that age to the adults we become, as both Venables and Thompson have proved in their different ways.
- David Short, Tunis, 30/07/2010 15:48
Report abuse
Who protected the young children in the pornographic material he was peddling?
Those are the ones who need protection not this scum bag.
It is time capital punishment was re-introduced.
- Steve, Bexhill-on-Sea, 30/07/2010 15:39
Report abuse
Once again the system supports the offender and not the victim. Bulger's parents have lost a son and who in the system cares? The victims of the child abuse images that Venables was downloading are probably not being traced and supported. Who in the system cares?
- BJ, East London, 30/07/2010 15:36
Report abuse
I have a feeling that this time his identity will come out fairly quickly. On the net there are many who could let his identity out with impunity and what could the judges do? I assume the Yorkshire Ripper would have been given a new identity if ever let out.
Let them serve their time and then let them out. What happens after is not for the taxpayer to pay.When he showed his true character as an adult there can be no sympathy for him - child porn - "The last taboo"? I though killing anyone and certainly an innocent child was the last taboo. there seems no doubt that he would kill again and abuse others. Broadmoor would probably the best place for him and for life.
- Terry, Hennebont France, 30/07/2010 15:15
Report abuse
I think this brings into focus the question of those supposedly keeping track of this low life. He was put back into the community where the general public were at risk and those who's job was to keep tabs on him failed...they are very fortunate that another other mother is not weeping for the death of her child. Those responsible for monitoring Jon Venables should be accountable. Their names should be known to us for the danger they put children in...when their job is not only protect Venables but protect innocent youngsters, they failed... in most jobs they would be sacked for incompetence. They should find other work more suited to their lack of ability.
- Alan Oliver, Luzon, Philippines, 30/07/2010 14:32
Report abuse
so?
- andy, highgate, 30/07/2010 14:12
Report abuse
This individual will never have any life now, so why not just give him a way out of it. A suicide pill, perhaps, or use him to find unexploded landmines. Then he'll go out with a bang!
- Dave, Devon, 30/07/2010 14:04
Report abuse
So Venables could realistically start a relationship, and have a family, with a young woman, who is unaware of his past? Surely the innocent public also need to be protected? The taxpayer is funding his new identity, yet he has no respect for this fact. If he had, he would not have abused it, by committing further crime. Obviously the taxpayers money on his "rehabilation" was a complete waste. I suggest if he wants his identity protected, as an adult, he fund the cost himself.
- MB, Kent, 30/07/2010 13:32
Report abuse
And the problem with that is...?
- Sam, Gravesend, Kent, UK, 30/07/2010 13:20
Report abuse
What I don't understand AT ALL is why this man will be eligible for parole in a years time? He's had his chance to turn his life around. THROW AWAY THE KEY!
- Juma, at work, here, 30/07/2010 13:13
Report abuse
He was given a second chance after what he did to James why give him a third chance. We all know he will reoffend again he is a sick individual who should have served life for what he did to James. Not given a slap on the wrist and a new life in a different country. And this just goes to prove it he has reoffended yet again and he will continue to do so until he is stopped for good. I say put him inside where he belongs with the other criminals.
- Tracey, Watford, 30/07/2010 13:07
Report abuse
Never mind that Jamie Bulger was in 'Clear and Mortal danger' from these pair of young psycho's??
- Chris, Bridgend, 30/07/2010 13:05
Report abuse
Quote: Jon Venables is in “clear and present danger” of being killed if his new name is made public, a High Court judge said today.
And innocent children are in a clear and present danger of being killed or abused if he remains protected and hidden from the public.
- mickinlondon, london, 30/07/2010 13:00
Report abuse
name him. I'll come back and do it myself. I lived in Liverpool when these despicable cowards killed that little boy. I'll never forget it. An eye for an eye.
- DD, Auckland, 30/07/2010 12:19
Report abuse
I'd be astonished if anyone in this country would shed a tear in the event of this horrible person making an early exit from this earth.
- ST, London, 30/07/2010 12:15
Report abuse
