The Murder of James Bulger

Whether you were an adult or a child in the early 90s, you’re likely to remember the case of James Bulger. In February of 1993, when James was just short of his third birthday, he was abducted from a shopping centre and murdered.

The murder of any child sticks in the mind. But what made the case of James Bulger so much more appalling were that his attackers were only children themselves.

The Day In Question: 12th of February 1993

James Bulger and his mother Denise were at the New Strand Shopping Centre running some errands. Denise Bulger was an aware mother, but like many 2-year-olds James was active and wanted to run around. He was being fussy, and didn’t want to be in his stroller, so while she stepped into the butcher to grab her order she left James outside with a bag of sweets. In the end, there was a mixup, and she was a few minutes longer than she intended. When she came back outside, James was gone.

That same morning, two young boys, 10-year-olds Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were wandering around the shopping centre. They were cutting school, and were at the shopping centre to steal, which they did more for the thrill than anything else. At some point during their time in the centre, they decided (although the source of the idea has never been confirmed) to take a child and either hurt them, get them lost, or perhaps push them into oncoming traffic.

Their hunt for opportunity and children took them close to the butcher shop, where they spotted James. Jon Venables walked up to him and took his hand, encouraging him to follow. Ever trusting, he did. Venables walked James out of the shopping centre, following Thompson. It was 3.42pm.

As soon as Denise realised that James was missing she rushed to the security centre. Children, unsurprisingly, were lost by parents in the centre all the time, and they gave a description of the boy over the loudspeakers. He was nowhere to be found. At 4.15pm a call to the police was made.

Discovering James

James Bulger was found on a train track several miles from the shopping centre on Sunday afternoon, three days after he went missing. He had been struck by a train, but his injuries indicated that he had been beaten severely between the time he went missing and his death. His injuries were horrific, and there was blue paint at the scene and on the body. This would prove a significant clue in apprehending his killers.

The police widened their search. They were now dealing with a murder.

Unexpected Suspects

The first thing that the police did in the case was release a CCTV image capture of the two suspects leading James Bulger out of the shopping centre.

The image was grainy, and the suspects were described as youths. 

One of them was wearing a distinctive yellow coat.

On Thursday February 18th, less than a week after James went missing, police showed up at the door of Jon Venables. They were responding to a tip from an anonymous caller, a friend of Jon’s mother Susan, who noted that Jon was known to have skipped school on Friday and he had come home with blue paint on his jacket. Jon’s mother did not seem surprised to see the police at her door looking for Jon, and gave them her son’s jacket, which was indeed splattered with blue paint. Hysterically, Jon began to blame Robert Thompson, whose name had already come up from the same anonymous tipster. The police picked both boys up, and took them to the police station.

Although boy Venables and Thompson were had distressed responses to their arrest, the police didn’t really believe that the boys were legitimate suspects. After all, they were only ten years old, and the youths from the video had appeared much older.

Interviewing The Boys

Over the next few days, both Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were interviewed by police. They were accompanied by their parents and legal counsel, and both spun wildly different stories of the events that occurred. The police believed that both boys were lying to lay blame on the other, and through manipulating those lies, they were able to arrive at what they understand to be the truth.

The truth was that together, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson had abducted, tortured and murdered James Bugler.

Both boys were charged on the evening of the Saturday, and their trial was set for November of that year. They would be detained until the trial, undergoing more interviews and psychological testing, while the court system tried to figure out how best to deal with Britain’s youngest murderers.

The Trail

During the trial public interest in the case was very high. The trial itself opened on the 1st of November 1993 in the style of an adult trial. This meant that the boys sat in the dock, were separated from their parents, and that all the court was formally presented.

The main aspect of the trial for most people was to prove that both Venables and Thompson understood that what they had done was wrong. The court needed to prove that both boys understood that abducting James, hurting him and eventually killing him was bad, and indeed that death was a permanent state.

Neither Venables or Thompson spoke at all during the trial. Most of the evidence presented against them was in the form of tape-recorded police interviews that were played back. There was also evidence given by child psychiatrists and forensic psychiatrists who had interviewed the boys. Though this evidence, the court proved without a doubt that both Venables and Thompson knew that their actions were wrong and illegal, and that they had done them anyway, fully aware that they would cause the death of James Bulger. However, the court also found that both Venables and Thompson came from abusive backgrounds, and that this had likely played a role in their behaviour.

Sentencing And After

Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, at the time both 11, were found guilty of the murder of James Bulger on the 24th of November 1993. In doing so they became the youngest convicted killers in the 20th century. The judge who presided over their case noted in his closing remarks that their actions were “both cunning and very wicked”.

They were sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure, for a term at least consisting of at least eight years. Not long after this, the Lord Chief Justice announced that the boys would serve a minimum term of ten years, and be eligible for parole in 2003 when they were twenty. Following a public petition that the boys should be kept in custody for a longer period, this sentence was increased yet again to fifteen years.

It seemed clear to all that the legal system wasn’t quite sure what to do with these very young offenders.

Following a number of debates and an analysis of the court proceedings by the European Court of Human Rights, these longer sentences were overturned. The reason behind this was that any extended period spent in a young offenders institution would make the emotional and behavioural situation of Venables and Thompson even worse.

In June of 2001, after serving eight years, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were released on a life license, given new identities, and moved to new locations.

Their life license included a number of terms, such as a strict curfew, a ban from visiting the area where the murder happened or contacting the Bulger family, and obviously a ban on crimes of any kind.

The Issue Of Identity

When the boys were arrested the media was only allowed to refer to them as Child A (Thompson) and Child B (Venables). But, when the trial was over the judge ultimately ruled that due to the nature of the crime and public outcry, their names should be released. In the end it seemed to make little difference, as both the boys and their families were given new identities and moved.

The issue has come to light over the years as the public wonders if it was really the right idea to release Venables and Thompson, who obviously had deep emotional and psychological trauma, back into the world. This was brought to culmination in 2010 when it was revealed that Jon Venables had been imprisoned for child pornography charges. He was released again in 2013.

What Was Learned

A case like the murder of James Bulger always brings a variety of opinions out in the open. Some people believed that Venables and Thompson were too young to have really understood what they were doing. Others noted that by hosting the trial in an adult court, the boys were unlikely to have received an impartial judgement. Hard-liners argued that both boys obviously had deep-seated issues, and that if they could have done something so evil at age 10, there was no limit on their potential for crime.

What do you think?