Mother of James Bulger demands information on her son’s killer

The BBC reports on the ongoing story regarding the killer of James Bulger, who was murdered in 1993 by two ten year olds. One of those two (who is now 27) has been arrested in connection with offences, the nature of which are still unclear. The Home Office has denied that the 27 year old is facing any charges, although there is apparently a criminal investigation.

The authorities are under strict legal constraints, given the fact that they themselves would have arranged new identities for the two boys who killed James Bulger. The long term plan would have been to rehabilitate the two back into the community. That process may still be ongoing, but very little is known about how the authorities dealt with these two children from 1993 onwards.

Normally in a criminal prosecution, the Defendant is identified from the outset unless the court makes an order banning the media from reporting their identity. 

There are a number of statutes that provide for protection against identification of children involved in any court proceedings. Section 39(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 provides protection for child defendants and witnesses in criminal proceedings. The court can direct that no newspaper may identify the child or publish photographs without leave of the court. 

Under section 12(1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 (as amended) the publication of information relating to proceedings under the Children Act 1989 or the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction over minors is a contempt of court. Section 4 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1974 contains similar restrictions.  The court also has further powers restricting publication of court proceedings under section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court 1981 section 4(2).   

Section 71(1) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states that it is a criminal offence to publicise other than limited details in relation to family proceedings and proceedings under the Adoption Act 1976. 

Section 97(2) of the Children Act 1989 provides:- 

“No person shall publish any material which is intended, or likely, to identify:- 

“(a) any child as being involved in any proceedings before the High Court, a county court or a magistrates court in which any power under this Act may be exercised by the court with respect to that or any other child; or 

(b) an address or school as being that of a child involved in any such proceedings.” 

Regulation 23 of the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rule 1991 and Rule 4.23 of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991 restricts disclosure of care proceedings documents to certain persons.

However the mother of James Bulger has demanded answers. This is a sad feature of these cases. The relatives of those taken away from them, find any news story on the subject intensely distressing.

There is another point to be made. Those who live in the neighbourhood of James Bulger’s killer, would want to know if there was a risk to their children.

On the 8th February 2010, we reported on how a new “Sarah’s Law” was to be implemented across the country, allowing parents to know if their children might be at risk from a convicted abuser in the neighbourhood. See Link.