UK Court to Protect Teen Killers' Identities

L O N D O N, Jan. 8, 2001 -- A judge has barred the media from disclosing the new identities of two teenagers who will soon be eligible for parole in the torture slaying of a toddler — one of the most notorious killings in recent British history.

In an unprecedented order today, Judge Elizabeth-Butler Sloss said she was convinced that Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, both now 18, would be in danger if the public knew who they were and where they lived.

Venables and Thompson were 10 years old when they abducted, tortured and killed 2-year-old James Bulger in 1993. They are eligible for release this year, and new identities will be created for them.

“These young men are uniquely notorious and are at serious risk of attacks from members of the public as well as from relatives and friends of the murdered child,” the judge said.

After reviewing press coverage of the case, Butler-Sloss concluded “that certain sections of the press would not wish the two young men to remain anonymous and would wish to have them identified.”

Baying for BloodMedia organizations that opposed the order were grantedpermission to appeal. The order applies only in England and Wales.

“There are already too many restrictions on reporting thecourts and this is another worrying precedent,” said RobertSatchwell, director of the Society of Editors.

Ralph Bulger, the victim’s father, last year said he intended totake revenge against the pair if he could find them. His attorney,Robin Makin, said today that “if there were adequate punishment,the furor would die down and society would feel less unhappy aboutthe situation.”

Denise Fergus, the victim’s mother, protested that the decisiontrampled on the family’s rights.

“As children, one can understand them being given someprotection but what right have they got to be given specialtreatment as adults as well?” she said in a statement read toreporters by Norman Brennan, director of the Victims of CrimeTrust.

“Both Venables and Thompson have dragged me, my family, and thename of James through every court possible in this country andEurope for which unlimited funds have been made available to themand their lawyers,” her statement said. “This is in completecontrast to the help made available to victims of crime in thiscountry.”

Thompson and Venables were convicted in 1993 of taking thetoddler from a shopping center in the north England town of Bootleto a railway line 2 miles away, where they beat him to death.They were identified from shopping center video images.

In 1999, Venables and Thompson won a European Court of HumanRights ruling that their trial was unfair, and that their rightswere violated when a politician — then-Home Secretary MichaelHoward — overruled the trial judge and nearly doubled their minimumsentence. In October, Lord Chief Justice Woolf reinstated theoriginal minimum term of eight years, making parole possible thisyear.

Limited RestrictionsBritish news media already have some restraints on theirfreedom, notably in covering criminal cases both before and duringtrials.

Today, for example, British media refrained from identifyinga murder defendant who leaped out of the dock at the Old Baileycriminal court and landed several punches on the 64-year-old judge,Ann Goddard. The defendant was not identified to avoid prejudicinghis right to a fair trial.

Children usually are not identified, but Venables and Thompsonwere tried as adults and publicly named. After they were convicted,court orders barred the news media from publishing theirphotographs or reporting about them. Those orders lapsed whenVenables and Thompson turned 18.

Desmond Browne, an attorney who represented various newspapergroups at the hearing in December, argued that the courts shouldconvict those who threaten Venables and Thompson rather than gagthe media.

“If there truly is a threat to the boys then the court shoulddirect its powers against those responsible for the threats, notcreate a judge-made exception to the law of freedom ofexpression,” Browne argued.

Today’s order went further than one that protected the newidentity of another convicted British murderer, Mary Bell, who was11 when she killed a 3-year-old and a 4-year-old in 1968.

After she was released in 1980, her new identity was shielded.However, that order was granted to protect Bell’s daughter.

Venables and Thompson broke new ground by securing orders purelyfor their own protection.