Jon Venables (and Robert Thompson) Jamie Bulger

Update 15th Feb 2013

1) I have removed the pics of the possible Jon Venables. There is supposedly a world wide injunction against it (see green note below) and the words of an anonymous commentator the other day which on did have a point – if the pic was that of an innocent person (entirely possible) then it’s wrong to suggest an association with Venables

2) Ralph Bulger, James’ father, does not appear in the media very much. The BBC has an article of him here:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21337506. I suggest a read.

 

UPDATE: 12 February 2013.

In memory of little James Bulger, the little boy who was savagely murdered and mutilated 20 years ago, on 12th Feb 1993, I no longer intend to remove comments from this thread, so, should you wish, you can comment freely.

Here’s what a regard as a pro-killer (Venables and Thompson) report by the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/11/james-bulger-20-years-on

But here’s a better article – of all places on the BBC! if you can believe that!: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-21426195

End of 12 Feb 2013 update.

——-

The issue was being discussed here: http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/paul-jon-williams-aka-child-killer-pornography-viewer-jon-venables/ as COMMENTS TO THIS ARTICLE ON lwtc247 ARE NOW CLOSED (20th June 2012). Thanks.

Update 11 Jan 2012:

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/paul-jon-williams-aka-child-killer-pornography-viewer-jon-venables/ Found this link which mentions the original Warrington Gazette article.

Update 8 May 2011:

Note: The following come from the pretty awful gutter “newspapers” but seem somewhat in-line with this horrific Jon Venables, and Id just like to say one of the officers involved in the killing and torture of James Bulger said they thought that Jon Venables was the one most likely to be successfully rehabilitated. How wrong they were and the (in)justice system continues to get it wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME with this piece of trash.

1) Revealed: The horror image drawn by Jon Venables just weeks before he killed James Bulger
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1256190/Revealed-The-horror-drawing-Jon-Venables-weeks-killed-James-Bulger.html#ixzz1LkxIA8UX

2) Bulger killer Jon Venables set to get fourth new identity – at cost of £1m to taxpayer
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384126/Bulger-killer-Jon-Venables-set-fourth-new-identity–cost-1m-taxpayer.html#ixzz1LkxLZCij

3) Killer Jon Venables gloats at sentence: “I’ll be out by the time I’m 30”
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/07/25/killer-jon-venables-gloats-at-sentence-i-ll-be-out-by-the-time-i-m-30-115875-22437653/#ixzz1LkxSt7yg

Note: I do not know if these are really him or not. There have been a number of false identifications.

[ Friday 15th Feb IMAGE REMOVED: Reason: There is supposedly a worldwide injunction against the image. I don’t for a second understand how such an injunction could possibly exist in the legal sense internationally, e.g. how the UK could possibly have any right over the First Amendment in the US  relating to freedom of the press , or even have automacitity over the UK’s practice (or laws?) that allows information in the public interest to be published! ,  but on the off chance that it does exist, then well, I guess it is a law that should be adhered to. If it was a political law, e.g. regarding the non-publication of crimes, lies and deceptions of governments and corporations, then such a law would fully deserved to be breached!  But until I’ve got more time to check this thing out, I feel, with reservations, it should be removed. If anyone would like to leave a comment as to this so called world wide injunction, I’d be grateful  if you could elaborate upon it . Thanks]

Venables is the person on the LEFT with the cap. CLICK to enlarge.

Even if they are, measly irrelevant little I, doesn’t advocate any violence against this person. I think it VERY important however that his (real) face (if this is he) is widely known as I believe he should ALWAYS be considered a risk to young children.

————————————

(Published on: May 4, 2011 @ 9:26) One of the most ‘popular’ things searched for on this blog is that of Jon Venables (and Robert Thompson). Recently there was stories in the tabloid press (Daily Mail and Sun) that pics of Jon Venables (as he looks now) have been published on the web.

Here are two pics from a site, http://www.chris-uk.org/jon-venables-aka-paul-jon-williams/34600, which claims to show what they look like now. The site has some alleged history about him.

Update 2: This website seems a mirror of what Chris has on his site: http://danmeah.co.uk/2011/05/04/jon-venables-aka-paul-jon-williams/

Copy the pics and history quickly as these sites are probably going to be taken down.

History:

Jon Venables was just 10 years old when he and friend Robert Thompson murdered toddler James Bulger.

Venables served seven years of a life sentence for the 1993 murder before he was freed in June 2001, aged 18. He was given a new name, (John Paul Williams) a job and a flat on his release to try to ensure his security and give him an “ordinary” life.

Had he gone on to lead such a life, that might have been the last the British public ever heard about Jon Venables. But at the age of 27, Venables finds himself back in the headlines and back behind bars having been jailed for two years after pleading guilty to charges of downloading and distributing indecent images of children.

A lifetime ban was placed on reporting anything about either his or Thompson’s whereabouts or their new identities after their release.

The ban relating to Venables was partially lifted on Friday at the Old Bailey after he was jailed for the offences under the 1978 Protection of Children Act. The judge revealed that Venables had been living in Cheshire at the time of the offences, and that the case was dealt with by Cheshire police and Cheshire probation service.

It was also revealed that Cheshire police had produced a “threat assessment” to try to establish what could happen to Venables were his new identity revealed. That assessment concluded that Venables would face the highest possible risk of being attacked if his name was either published in the media or known elsewhere in society.

Police had even trained him in counter-surveillance after he was told he would have to “live and hold a lie” for the rest of his life. Venables worked full-time in a job with anti-social hours, earning close to the minimum wage, the court heard.

Then in 2007, he started drinking heavily and taking drugs, including cocaine and the recently-banned substance mephedrone.

On 20 September 2008, he was held on suspicion of affray over a street fight with a man who claimed Venables had attacked his girlfriend. Both men were charged with a public order offence, but this was later dropped.

Venables was formally warned by the Probation Service for breaking a “good behaviour” clause in his licence. Three months later, police cautioned him for possessing cocaine, and a requirement was added to his licence ordering him to address his alcohol and drug problems, the court was told.

It was not until February that it emerged Venables had been recalled to prison for breaching the conditions of his release. The Ministry of Justice refused to reveal any details, but the then Justice Secretary Jack Straw did say the recall was prompted by “extremely serious allegations

In the Pircture Is Paul Jon Williams whilst working in  Warrington Pizza hut (Riverside Retail Park) just before he was arrested for child abuse images

[ Friday 15th Feb IMAGE REMOVED: Reason: There is supposedly a worldwide injunction against the image. I don’t for a second understand how such an injunction could possibly exist in the legal sense internationally, e.g. how the UK could possibly have any right over the First Amendment in the US  relating to freedom of the press , or even have automacitity over the UK’s practice (or laws?) that allows information in the public interest to be published! ,  but on the off chance that it does exist, then well, I guess it is a law that should be adhered to. If it was a political law, e.g. regarding the non-publication of crimes, lies and deceptions of governments and corporations, then such a law would fully deserved to be breached!  But until I’ve got more time to check this thing out, I feel, with reservations, it should be removed. If anyone would like to leave a comment as to this so called world wide injunction, I’d be grateful  if you could elaborate upon it . Thanks]

I still believe they should ‘out’ themselves as a sign of true remorse. Being able to live a secret life has proved to allow them to slip into what I can only describe as a ‘criminal lifestyle’.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–