The High Court is set to decide whether a ban on identifying the killers of Angela Wrightson should remain in place now that they have turned 18. The two women were aged 13 and 14 when they tortured and murdered the 39-year-old in her Hartlepool home in 2014, suffering more than 70 slash injuries and 54 blunt-force injuries in a seven-hour attack. They were granted anonymity as juveniles, and the court must now balance their right to privacy with public interest.
Child defendants under 18 in England and Wales cannot be identified except in exceptional circumstances, such as a pressing social need. In 1993, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, aged 10, were named after murdering James Bulger because the judge ruled public interest overrode the defendants' rights. They later received lifelong anonymity and new identities upon release in 2001, with a court order protecting their identities to prevent risk of harm.
In 2014, restrictions were lifted on naming 16-year-old Will Cornick, who murdered his teacher Ann Maguire. The judge argued identification served the public interest and had a deterrent effect, allowing debate on school safety. However, critics like Frances Cook of the Howard League argued that the child becomes notorious and cannot escape the crime.
Mary Bell, convicted at age 11 for killing two boys in 1968, was named during trial but later granted a new identity and lifelong anonymity in 2003, after tabloids tracked her down. The judge stressed each case is judged individually, and the anonymity was to protect her and her daughter.
Emily Setty, a criminology lecturer, suggests the public wants child killers identified because such crimes challenge societal views of childhood, often labelling them as 'born evil' to distance them from other children. The High Court's decision on the Wrightson killers will hinge on whether they remain 'uniquely notorious' like Venables, or if identification serves a wider public interest.
