Child killer of James Bulger posed as mum online offering daughter to paedophiles
Published 09/11/2011 | 11:07
THE sickening details of the child porn James Bulger killer Jon Venables was involved in were revealed today.
Venables, (28) who murdered the Liverpool toddler when he was 10, pretended online to be a mother who was willing to allow her daughter to be abused by paedophiles.
He will stay in prison indefinitely because he cannot be trusted to keep a lid on his dark past.
Venables and his friend Robert Thompson were just 10 when they were jailed for life after they abducted, tortured and murdered two-year-old James Bulger in 1993.
Both were released in 2001 and given new identities for their own safety.
But Venables was jailed again last year on child pornography charges.
The detective who led the murder inquiry said Venables was not ready to be released from custody in the first place.
Venables had been on a "downward spiral" of drink and drugs as he struggled to live his life under an assumed identity, the court heard.
According to sources, officials have now ruled out giving him another false identity, because they reportedly believe he is not able to keep his dark past secret.
It means Venables will remain in prison for the foreseeable future, though he will be able to apply for parole periodically in an attempt to convince the authorities they can trust him on the outside.
Robin Makin, solicitor for James's father Ralph, said: "It does not surprise me. The reality is the authorities can't handle the situation. How could they?
"They are in an impossible situation."
Retired detective superintendent Albert Kirby, who led the Bulger murder inquiry for Merseyside Police, said: "I think society generally should receive some comfort from the fact that the authorities have identified he does have serious mental health issues.
"My view is the authorities made a diabolical decision to release him.
"Irrespective of what he did, he had to be in the right position mentally and physically to face life.
"It is quite obvious at the time he was not fit to face the outside world and live under a new identity.
"He just did not have the capacity to do it.
"Over the years, those charged with looking after him were negligent."
A British Ministry of Justice spokesman declined to comment.