By
Stephen Wright and Paul Sims
Last updated at 1:33 AM on 08th March 2010
At first sight, it appears to be a child’s attempt at illustrating a terrible nightmare.
But what makes this image so horrifying is that it was a violent fantasy, inspired by the 18-rated horror movie Halloween, and that the ten-year-old artist was close to committing a deadly act of his own in real life.
Jon Venables drew the stick-men style picture weeks before he and Robert Thompson abducted and murdered James Bulger in 1993.
Nightmare drawing: Jon Venables drew this horrific image only weeks before he and Robert Thompson murdered two-year-old James Bulger
The release of the image came as it was revealed that Venables will be charged with a criminal offence and faces the prospect of a court case over the possession of child pornography.
The dramatic development means Venables will have to appear in a public arena for the first time since his conviction for murder in November 1993.
The never-seen-before drawing by Venables is believed to have been unused evidence prepared for his murder trial.
The image shows an attacker with enormous knives,
slashing two individuals who are prostrate with blood gushing out of
their bodies.
It gives an insight into the deeply disturbed mind of a boy
who was brought up in a dysfunctional home and, despite his tender
years, routinely watched sick horror movies.
Child killer: Jon Venables is expected to be charged with possession of child pornography
It was found at his father Neil’s home.
Venables, who was said to have been subjected to regular beatings by his mother Susan, titled the drawing ‘My Dads house’.
Words with the drawing, full of spelling mistakes and grammatical
errors, make little sense apart from illustrating the story of the
1970s slasher movie Halloween.
Venables wrote: ‘In my dads I saw howowen is when you a girl
and this man and he kiled people especial girls and he has got a mask
on that he robed knifes out the shop and the police that it was pice
but it was not it was the man.’
Author Blake Morrison, who describes seeing the drawing in his
book on the Bulger case, As If, said: ‘The drawing suggests how seeing
Halloween deeply disturbed an already deeply disturbed little boy.
Did
something else happen at home to disturb Jon? Was he frightened by
Susan’s physical chastisings? The knife wielder in his drawing has
breasts.’
For his upcoming trial, Venables is expected to appear under the identity he has used since his release from custody nine years ago.
The case is likely to be held amid unprecedented secrecy to protect his new identity from leaking out.
Venables, now 27, was given a new name at huge expense on his release from a secure unit in 2001.
While there is no significant public clamour for Venables’s identity to
be disclosed, the decision to withhold from the public the exact nature
of the offence – which carries a maximum penalty of five years in jail
and has seen him recalled to prison – has prompted outrage.
James’s father Ralph Bulger, 43, told the Daily Mail: ‘If the
Government has got nothing to hide then it should tell us the truth
now. For the past week we have had nothing but rumours and innuendo and
this is even more dangerous than knowing the truth.
Critics believe the cover-up has been ordered to prevent any
further embarrassment for ministers over the Home Office’s supervision
of one of Britain’s most notorious killers.
But despite ministers’ refusal to come clean:
• On Thursday it was revealed he has had drink and drugs problems since his release from a secure unit in 2001.
• On Saturday he was accused of a serious sex offence and it was revealed he had previously worked as a nightclub bouncer.
• Yesterday it was claimed he had been caught with child pornography and had even disclosed his real identity to strangers.
RULES THAT KEPT HIS IDENTITY A SECRET
Since the release of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables in 2001, a
court order has been in place banning the identification of the killers
or their whereabouts.
The aim was to give them the best possible chance of rehabilitation without fear of vigilante attacks or harassment.
Both were given new identities and the Press is formally barred from making inquiries that could lead to their identification.
The restrictions imposed by the court order, which still remains in place today, include:
• A ban on publishing any image or description of either of
the pair including details of their voices or accents since February
18, 1993 (the time of their arrest).
• No information published or solicited that could identify Thompson or Venables.
• No information published or solicited that could identify their whereabouts.
• No information to be published detailing their medical treatment or any therapy received.
Probation officers and police are trying to establish what
contact he has had with children since his release from a secure unit
in 2001 and how Venables came to be in possession of the appalling
images.
Their worst fears are he could be part of an internet
paedophile ring which traded sick images of children ‘to order’.
Last
night sources close to the inquiry suggested that Venables will be charged with criminal offences ‘imminently’.
But there are already fears that because of sensitivities around the case, in particular his ’secret’ new identity, any trial could be subjected to unprecedented reporting restrictions, meaning the public may never know precisely what happened and whether the authorities could have monitored him more closely.
The terms of his parole imposed strict conditions on his contact with youngsters but there are fears that Venables may have deceived his probation handlers.
If that is the case, it would constitute a major supervision scandal which could engulf those who supported his release from custody nine years ago and the Home Office unit which had responsibility for over-seeing his ‘rehabilitation’.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw has refused to detail how Venables breached his licence terms, saying only that he faces ‘extremely serious allegations’.
James’s father Ralph said: ‘If they don’t let the British people know then we can only assume that politicians have got something to hide and their silence is protecting not just the killers of my son but the politicians themselves.’
James’s mother Denise Fergus, 42, said: ‘If he is accused of a crime he must be subject to the law like everyone else.’
She has demanded to know why Venables was put back in jail, and is meeting Mr Straw to discuss the matter.
Albert Kirby, the retired police chief who led the Bulger murder inquiry, said: ‘I can see no reason why they can’t release a brief statement, outlining what he is accused of, but stressing that nothing more can be said because of an on-going police investigation.’
Venables was recalled to prison about two weeks ago for breaching the good behaviour clause in his life licence after police discovered he was in possession of child porn.
As part of the investigation, Venables had his computer seized and on it officers found indecent images of young children.
‘The police are investigating an alleged child porn ring and he was swept up in that,’ said a source. ‘When officers seized his laptop computer they discovered the images and arrested him.
The parents of James Bulger, pictured, have called on the government to end the secrecy over Jon Venables’ latest crime
‘As soon as the images were found those who knew his true identity did a recall to prison. They felt there was no alternative.’
It is believed that Venables, who is said to deny any wrongdoing, could be charged in the next few weeks. This could involve prosecuting him under a second false name and even altering his age.
Sources said Venables was ‘psychologically stressed’ before he was recalled to prison, to such an extent that he began revealing his true name to people.
It was claimed that he descended into a ‘persistent state of self-disclosure’ in which he felt compelled to tell others that he was one of Britain’s most notorious murderers.
Ian Cumming, a consultant forensic psychiatrist who has worked with serious offenders in the prison system, said ‘the national demonisation of an individual was a heavy burden’ that could explain why someone would find it difficult to keep their past hidden for ever.
‘Double lives are a burden for people,’ Mr Cumming said. ‘Just juggling two relationships is stressful and the secrecy takes its toll. People are not necessarily well equipped to do this sort of thing; it’s not their natural state.’
Some senior politicians yesterday lined up to support the Government’s refusal to reveal what Venables has been accused of.
Labour’s deputy leader Harriet Harman said that disclosure of the alleged offence could prejudice a fair trial – even though no media outlet is allowed to publish Venables’ new identity.
And asked whether he felt Venables had spent long enough in custody for James’s murder, Children’s Secretary Ed Balls told Sky News: ‘A society where politicians make those kinds of decisions would be the wrong kind of society. It is rightly a matter for judges and courts and juries.’
THE EXTREME STRESS OF LIVING LIFE AS A LIE
By PROFESSOR DAVID WILSON at Birmingham City University
Venables has been described as an ‘attention seeker’ and reportedly revealed his true identity to strangers
The speculation about the behaviour of Jon Venables continues to intensify.
But whatever the truth about the actions that have landed him in prison again, this episode demonstrates the severe pressures of living under an assumed identity, especially for someone who is already profoundly disturbed.
It is perhaps telling that Venables’ fellow killer, Robert Thompson, seems to have adjusted to his new life more successfully.
According to what we know of the two boys’ troubled histories, Thompson was always the harder, colder figure, hence his role in instigating the murder of James Bulger.
In contrast, Venables was more of an attention-seeker.
At his primary school, he would hang upside down like a bat from wall pegs in his classroom, or howl maniacally to force his teachers to confront him.
It has been reported that in recent months he has been compulsively revealing his true identity, even to complete strangers – yet another form of desperate attention-seeking.
It must be near impossible for a pathological attention-seeker to live a secret life.
Venables and Thompson are two of only four criminals in British history who have been given new identities.
The other two are Maxine Carr, the former girlfriend of Soham child murderer Ian Huntley, and Mary Bell, who, as a girl, strangled two boys to death in 1968.
The long-term experience of Bell, who is now a grandmother, shows that it is possible to cope with a new identity. But it is extremely difficult.
I have seen this for myself as a criminologist and former prison governor, work that gave me an insight into the Witness Protection Scheme.
There are no fewer than 3,000 people on this programme, and most are individuals who have put themselves at risk by giving vital evidence against serious criminals.
Because of Hollywood films and TV dramas, there is an assumption that an assumed identity leads to a glamorous life. But nothing could be further from the truth.
People on the Witness Protection Scheme lead extremely routine, humdrum lives precisely so that they will not be noticed. They have to blend in with the ordinary people around them. The banality is part of their cover.
But there is nothing banal about having to live a fictional life. It puts the individual under immense psychological pressure.
The strain comes partly from the ever-present threat of being exposed. Danielle Cable, for example, was given a new identity after she heroically gave evidence in court against notorious underworld gangster Kenneth Noye, who stabbed her boyfriend Steven Cameron to death in front of her on the M25 in 1996.
She once said: ‘Every day I live in fear of a contract killer or the assassin’s bullet. That is the reality of a new life.’
Venables and Roberts, meanwhile, must live in fear of vigilantes.
But further psychological pressure comes from erasing your past. Those on the Witness Protection scheme are not only given new birth certificates, bank accounts, driving licences and passports, but they also have to avoid any contact with people from their previous lives.
Some can no longer even communicate with their families.
Because we tend to define ourselves by our past deeds, memories and relationships, such a drastic step is extremely hard to handle – even for an emotionally robust person.
Effectively, the individual is being asked to live a permanent lie.
And for someone as broken as Venables, this has obviously proved impossible.
Share this article:
A lot of children have been brought up in dysfunctional homes, but not many children have killed other children because of it. Too much sympathy was placed on these boys because of their upbringing, but they did go to school and they did mingle with other children and were able to learn right from wrong outside the home if not inside. Watching horror movies, a normal child would at worst end up with nightmares, but they would be able to know the difference between real life and fiction. These two boys, especially venables had a twisted mind to start with, and alarm bells should have rung when these pictures were found at the time that there was more going on in his head than a bad upbringing. These two should have had more time locked up. The public knew it then, but the experts only seem to realise it now. Using one person -Mary Bell, as a yard stick is not good enough, one swallow does not a summer make.
- Anne, clackmannanshire, 08/3/2010 01:53
Report abuse
DM reports “The case is likely to be held amid unprecedented secrecy to protect his new identity from leaking out. ”
Why the hell should the taxpayer fund this nonsense? Answer: we shouldn’t! This appalling individual has exhausted all channels of help from the taxpayer and must now take his chances in public like anybody else.
- WeAreAngry, England, forever England, 08/3/2010 01:51
Report abuse
This is why I believe in the death penalty. Unspeakable crimes will be repeated by these offenders and those who didn’t stop them when they had the chance have blood on their hands.
- Karina, Canada, 08/3/2010 01:44
Report abuse
The press-release should’ve either been full or not at all. Informing the British public that a murderer responsible for one of the most attention-grabbing headlines of the last few decades has been put back behind bars is wrong, if you aren’t at least going to give a reason.
The unknowing in itself has created a media frenzy, and perhaps a witch hunt so to speak. The Government has created its own downfall here; they could’ve curtailed the search for information by just stating the facts; after all, we all know there is an injunction protecting the identity of the perpetrators, but not charges or information relating to the case, as would be the norm if you were to read about it if this case was ‘normal’.
Either tell us or don’t. It’s frustrating. I’m not sure I want to know the identity of these two guys. I’m certainly not in the eye-for-an-eye camp anyway. What I do want to know is what Venables has done, and whether he poses a threat to society should he be released, again.
- David Everest, Great Yarmouth, 08/3/2010 01:31
Report abuse
Stop this killer before he kills again. Protect society!
- Becky, London/Denver, 08/3/2010 01:23
Report abuse
Clearly Venables is insane and should have been locked away, in hindsight before he murdered James Bulger but after the murder he should never have been released.. His eyes are empty, hollow and evil.
Who knows what crimes he has committed and gotten away with since.
- Sheriff, Worcester, England, 08/3/2010 01:13
Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
