The rumour mill has started, the UK Daily Mail reported today – Jon Venables was sent back to jail for ‘drugs and workplace brawl’ , a report gleaned from the Daily Mirror, and an astounding revelation also revealed was the estimated cost of this case, around 5.5Million Pounds…. all to protect these two killers.. why ?
According to reports now surfacing, Venables developed an attitude and was always in some sort of trouble, even allegedly being given a “warning” when police discovered him snorting cocaine in a back alley one night..
This story By Stephen Wright, James Slack, Tim Shipman and James Tozer from the Daily Mail is too interesting to not present here, I trust they don’t mind :
One of James Bulger’s killers was allegedly returned to prison after ‘flipping’ and grappling with a colleague at his minimum-wage job, it was revealed today.
Sources told how Jon Venables, now 27, had been using ecstasy and cocaine since 2001 and had a violent temper.
The claims will fuel demands for the Government to break its silence and officially reveal why he is back behind bars.
Suspicion was growing that Venables had returned to violence, which raised fresh doubt over the wisdom of releasing the two murderers in the first place.
Last night, it was claimed the 27-year-old had been recalled after attacking a work colleague.
A source told the Daily Mirror that the pair grappled before others intervened and pulled them apart.
His alleged victim is said to have made an official complaint about the attack which led to Venables’s suspension from his job.
And it was alleged that in December 2008 Venables was arrested by police after being seen taking cocaine in an alleyway with another man. It was claimed he was later let off with a caution.
The Ministry of Justice refused to comment on the claims today.
Gordon Brown, when pressed this morning, said he understood the public ‘outrage’ but insisted it was right not to lay bare the details of the recall.
‘What we are talking about is a totally abhorrent crime that happened some years ago but that still, rightly so, disgusts and offends the British people and I can rightly understand the public outrage, even after so many years,’ the Prime Minister said.
‘But the public know that we cannot comment on individual cases that are going through the system and I think the Justice Secretary explained the particular constraints in this case.
‘What matters here is that the justice system is allowed to run its course and that justice is done, whatever wrongs are committed. The justice system must be allowed to take the action that is necessary. That is what people would expect and that is what is going to happen.’
Mr Straw said yesterday that it was ‘not in the public interest’ to reveal how Venables breached his parole nine years after he was controversially released from custody.
Yet hours earlier, Home Secretary Alan Johnson had declared on TV that he believed ‘the public do have a right to know’.
Mr Bulger added: ‘From day one, everything has been done to protect the human rights of Venables.
‘He was given a second chance, unlike my son, but he has blown it and now he deserves for those same human rights to be revoked and for the Government to reveal all. My biggest fear now is whether another child has been killed and another family is going through the hell we live with every day.’
On her Twitter page, James’s 42-year-old mother Denise Fergus wrote: ‘Would like to let everyone know Jon Venables is where he belongs tonight behind bars. Is this my son’s justice?’
She added today: ‘I’ve always said that there are more good people then bad in this world and the messages I’ still receiving proves it. Thanks to everyone x.’
A spokesman for Mrs Fergus confirmed that she had not been informed of the reason for the recall. ‘The decision to inform Denise that Venables is in custody, without telling her what he has done, is very callous and insensitive.
‘Denise agrees with Alan Johnson that she and the public have a right to know what Venables has done, and what his punishment will be.’
As few as eight officials were said to know the precise reason why the killer has been returned to jail, although ministers privately briefed the Tories and Liberal Democrats to explain what had happened.
Few details are known about Venables since his release but he is believed to have been involved in several aggression-related incidents.
In 2007 unconfirmed reports suggested Venables was to marry a pretty office worker he started dating two years earlier.
He was then taken to hospital for emergency surgery after violence flared in the street when a man tried to chat up his girlfriend.
In 2003, both Venables and Thompson were believed to have been treated to a holiday at taxpayers’ expense to keep them safe on the tenth anniversary of the toddler’s horrific death.
But Venables’s attitude was so bad that frustrated police minders threw him across the bonnet of a car – and threatened to leave him chained to a lamp-post in Liverpool to teach him a lesson.
The row over the public’s right to know why Venables has returned to prison was stoked by confusion and farce at Whitehall yesterday.
In an early-morning television appearance, the Home Secretary said more details would be released.
Mr Johnson told Sky News: ‘I believe the public do have a right to know and I believe they will know all the facts in due course. But I must in no way prejudice the future criminal justice proceedings.’
The last remark appeared to break the Government’s code of silence by implying that Venables faced a possible court case.
Mr Straw was then sent out to try to clear up the mess. He said: ‘I’m sorry that I cannot give more information at this stage on the nature of the alleged breach.
Eight years of pampering, then a new life
By MICHAEL SEAMARK
At the time, the decision by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson to remain voluntarily in secure children’s units for an extra six months after their release order was interpreted as a fear of freedom.
But given what they were leaving behind, who would blame them for their reluctance to leave?
During their eight years of detention, they lived a life of comfort and expensive rehabilitation, cookery lessons and trips to watch Manchester United.
Coming from broken homes and dysfunctional families, they enjoyed an education far better than most of their contemporaries.
Many, not least James’s family, were furious that Venables and Thompson were freed without ever spending a day in an adult prison for the shocking murder.
Draconian legal injunctions giving them anonymity for life were put in place when the pair were released in 2001.
‘I know there’s an intense public interest in why he has been recalled. I would like to give that information but I’m sorry that for good reasons I can’t and that’s in the public interest.’
Each was given a new identity, backed up passport, birth certificate, National Insurance documents and NHS records. Bank accounts and credit cards were set up under their new names.
They were coached in their cover stories and given elocution lessons to lose their Liverpool accents.
Years of preparation had gone into the boys’ release, with personal tutors mentoring Venables during his stay at Red Banks Children’s Home, a former approved school at Newton-le-Willows, Merseyside, only 13 miles from the Bulger family home at Kirkby.
Thompson was nine miles further towards Manchester, at Barton Moss, near Eccles.
While serving his sentence, he began letters to friends: ‘It’s Bobby here, live from the five-star Hotel Barton Moss.’
He had his own room – with TV and Playstation – in the modern, 20-bed complex, with the use of a garden, gym, games room and computer room.
Thompson, who developed an interest in textiles and design, won praise for a beaded wedding dress he made, as well as a tapestry of a lion’s head which hung in the foyer.
He passed five GCSEs and took A-levels, was taken on supervised days out to shopping centres, the Lake District and the theatre at Stratford-upon-Avon to get him used to the public.
For Venables, life at Red Bank – once home to child killer Mary Bell – was even cushier. His regime included a bigger and better room than other inmates – decorated with Manchester United wallpaper and complete with computer, games and a TV.
He could ride scramble motorbikes in the school grounds, enjoyed regular family visits and took trips to Wales and a swimming pool in nearby Wigan.
Every month £25 was put into his account for clothes, £6 for toiletries and £4 for a haircut. For each birthday he received £30 and for Christmas £40, rising to £60 once he was 16.
Before his release he was taken with his father to Old Trafford to watch Manchester United play – ostensibly to get him used to being in large crowds and try to reduce his fear of being recognised and attacked.
Since their release, the legal injunctions mean the public know little about the lifestyles of either Venables or Thompson.
When not working, both are entitled to benefits to ensure neither drifts back into crime.
Both see probation officers at least four times a year and officers are on call 24 hours a day in case either needs help or advice.
THE £5.5M BILL
The Bulger case is already estimated to have cost the taxpayer £5.5million. Here is the breakdown:
Police investigation: £500,000
Murder trial (prosecution and defence costs): £1million
Time killers spent in custody in secure units: £2.5million
Setting up and maintaining new identities for Venables, Thompson and families: £1.5million
Source : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1255274/James-Bulger-killer-Jon-Venables-sent-jail-drugs-workplace-brawl.html#comments