A number of criminals have been granted lifelong anonymity
In Britain’s justice system, a handful of some of the country’s most notorious criminals live under a protection few others receive after committing some of the most brutal crimes.
The controversial legal rulings mean their identities, whereabouts and even details that might reveal their new lives cannot be published. In some cases they have been given new names, new homes and entirely new identities that can cost the taxpayer to maintain.
Supporters argue the orders are necessary to prevent vigilante attacks and allow rehabilitation – particularly when offenders were children when they committed their crimes. But critics, including victims’ families, say the protections place the rights of killers above those of the people whose lives they destroyed.
Child killer Mary Bell
Mary Bell, who murdered two small children when she was 11 years old(Image: Mirrorpix)
Few cases in British criminal history shocked the nation quite like that of Mary Bell, who was just 11 years old when she was convicted of killing two small boys in 1968.
The murders took place in Scotswood, Newcastle upon Tyne. Bell’s first victim was four-year-old Martin Brown, who was found dead in an abandoned house in May 1968. Weeks later, she killed three-year-old Brian Howe, strangling him before mutilating the body.
In both cases she told the victims they has sore throats that she would massage before strangling them. The killings were described in court as deeply disturbing and she was diagnosed with psychopathic personality disorder. Jurors heard how she was abused by her dominatrix mother, who also allegedly allowed her clients to sexually abuse her.
In December 1968, a jury cleared Bell of murder but convicted her of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. She was ordered to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure, an indefinite sentence for juvenile offenders.
Bell served just under 12 years in custody before being released in 1980 aged 23 with lifetime anonymity. Four years later she gave birth to a daughter who is said to have known nothing about her past until 1998 when Bell was found to be living in a Sussex seaside town.
According to victim Martin Brown’s sister, Linda, Bell moved back to Tyneside for a spell after jail. “I know she has come to Tyneside on several occasions and had lived here for some time after her release,” she told the Chronicle, calling for her anonymity to be lifted. “I look at faces in the streets and think could it be her. She took my brother’s life and took our lives in the process. I want my children to be protected from her.”
In 2003, the High Court also granted Bell’s daughter anonymity. It was later extended to protect her granddaughter as well.
Since then, Bell has lived quietly under assumed identities in different parts of the UK. Reports over the years have suggested she has lived in several different areas, though her exact location remains legally protected.
Maxine Carr
Maxine Carr provided her partner Ian Huntley a false alibi(Image: Getty Images)
While not a killer herself, Maxine Carr became one of the most controversial recipients of lifelong anonymity. Carr was the girlfriend of school caretaker Ian Huntley, who murdered 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in Soham in 2002.
During the investigation Carr lied to police to give Huntley a false alibi, claiming he had been with her at the time of the murders. She was eventually convicted of perverting the course of justice and sentenced to three and a half years in prison.
Carr served 21 months before being released in 2004, after which the government granted her a new identity and lifelong anonymity order. The court ruled the protection was necessary because of the real risk she could be attacked by members of the public if her identity became known.
Since leaving prison she has reportedly moved several times under police protection and rebuilt her life under a different name. Reports over the years have suggested she has married and had children.
Huntley died on Saturday following a brutal prison attack nine days earlier that left him in a vegetative state. Providing protection for Carr has reportedly cost the taxpayer millions, with estimates suggesting around £2.5million has been spent on safeguarding her since her release.
Her new life is believed to cost the taxpayer up to £500,000 a year. She is also said to have changed her appearance with cosmetic surgery, along with £8,000 of dental work. The Daily Mail reports that back in 2008, Carr asked for a breast reduction on the NHS for mental health reasons, claiming to be “depressed because they were too small”.
Angela Wrightson’s child killers
Angela Wrightson was a vulnerable woman(Image: PA)
In December 2014, 39-year-old Angela Wrightson was brutally murdered in her own home in Hartlepool. The killers were two teenage girls aged 13 and 14.
Wrightson had befriended the girls and allowed them into her house. Over the course of several hours they subjected her to a sustained and sadistic assault, beating her with a range of household objects including a television set, coffee table and wooden stick studded with screws. She suffered more than 100 injuries during the attack. The teenagers even took photographs and shared images on social media, including a selfie while sitting in a police van afterwards.
In 2016 both girls were convicted of murder and given life sentences with a minimum term of 15 years. The judge ruled that they should remain anonymous due to their age and vulnerability. As a result, even once they are released – which could happen after serving their minimum terms – their whereabouts will be unknown.
The Edlington brothers
The boys were left with serious injuries(Image: PA)
Another case that shocked Britain involved the Edlington brothers, who carried out a horrific attack on two younger boys in South Yorkshire. The brothers – aged 10 and 11 at the time – lured the victims to a wooded area near Edlington, Doncaster, in 2009, promising to show them a toad before subjecting them to a 90-minute sadistic assault.
The victims, aged nine and 11, were tortured, beaten with bricks, forced to eat nettles, stabbed and left for dead. After a sink was dropped on the older victim’s head, he told the younger one, “I can’t see and I can’t move my body. You go and I’ll just die here.” Miraculously, both survived despite suffering life-threatening injuries.
Part of the attack was recorded on one of the brother’s mobile phones and in 2010 the brothers were convicted of attempted murder and detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure.
They were freed in 2016 after a judge ruled that they were no longer a threat, and granted lifetime anonymity in a bid to aid their ‘rehabilitation’.
The older attacker is said to have had ‘some difficulties’ readjusting to normal life. Granting anonymity, High Court judge Sir Geoffrey Vos said of the younger brother: “He fully acknowledged the extreme gravity of his offences, and said compellingly that he now feels inside like a completely different person.
“He said that, ‘[it] has taken a long time to get there and I have done loads of work with professionals in secure to work through what I did and why I did it. I now feel like I have become the opposite to that person who did the crimes. I desperately want to carry on being the person I have become. I want to get a job or maybe even go to uni.'”
James Bulger killers
Robert Thompson and Jon Venables lured James Bulger to his death(Image: PA)
Perhaps the most contentious anonymity order in British legal history surrounds the killers of toddler James Bulger. In 1993, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, both aged just 10, abducted the two-year-old from a shopping centre in Liverpool. They tortured and murdered him before leaving his body on a railway line. The case horrified the country.
After serving eight years in custody, the pair were released in 2001 and given new identities and lifelong anonymity due to the overwhelming risk of vigilante violence. The decision sparked fierce debate that continues to this day. While Robert Thompson has not been convicted of further crimes since his release, Jon Venables has repeatedly returned to prison.
He was first recalled to prison in 2010 after police discovered indecent images of children on his computer. He pleaded guilty and was jailed for two years.
The case caused outrage because it emerged he had already been arrested twice in 2008 for cocaine possession and affray, but authorities had not recalled him to prison at the time. Investigators also found dozens of illegal images and videos, with evidence he had attempted to delete far more from his computer.
Venables was released again in 2013, after serving his sentence and undergoing further rehabilitation programmes. But he was recalled to prison again in 2017 after once more being found with child abuse images.
He was sentenced to three years and four months in prison. A Parole Board hearing in 2023 rejected his bid for release, citing ongoing risks and concerns about whether he had been fully honest with professionals supervising him. He is due to have another hearing soon.
Thompson, meanwhile, reportedly achieved five GCSEs, completed A-Levels and developed a keen interest in art. In 2006, reports emerged that Thompson had settled into a stable long-term relationship with a man – with his partner believed to be aware of his real identity. Thompson’s 2001 parole board statement was made public for the first time in 2018 during a Channel 5 documentary, James Bulger: The New Revelations.
In his statement, he confessed: “At that time of my life, I was completely out of control and spending time with a group of friends whose main occupation was committing crime and causing trouble. I was out of control because my life on the streets was better for me than my life at home – there was nothing for me at home.”
He went on to say: “I do feel aware that I am now a better person and have had a better life and a better education than if I had not committed the murder. There is obviously an irony to this, but it is part of my remorseful feelings as well. I, personally, wish Mr and Mrs Bulger and their families to know that I am desperately sorry for what I did, and aware of the enormity of what I did.
