The latest parole hearing for one of Britain’s most infamous prisoners, Charles Bronson, will be held behind closed doors, a Parole Board judicial member has ruled, despite Bronson’s long-standing campaign for transparency in the parole process.
Bronson, born Michael Peterson and now aged 72, is considered one of the UK’s longest-serving prisoners, having spent nearly five decades behind bars. He is well known for his history of violent behaviour in prison, including multiple hostage-taking incidents. In 2014, he changed his name to Charles Salvador in honour of artist Salvador Dalí.
His case has frequently attracted public attention, not least due to his reputation and the often volatile nature of his time in custody. Bronson’s criminal record includes offences ranging from armed robbery to grievous bodily harm. His incarceration has also been punctuated by violent episodes involving prison governors, doctors, fellow inmates, and, on one occasion, even his own solicitor.
Despite his notoriety, Bronson made legal history in 2023 when he became the first prisoner to formally request – and receive – a public parole hearing after new rules were introduced in 2022 to increase transparency in the parole process.
However, in a document published on Tuesday, Parole Board judicial member Jeremy Roberts KC confirmed that Bronson’s most recent application for another public hearing had been declined.
Mr Roberts said the decision was not taken lightly but was necessary given the circumstances. While acknowledging Bronson’s role in bringing about the legislative changes allowing public hearings, Mr Roberts wrote that “his responsibility for the change in law does not give him any legitimate expectation that future hearings should automatically be held in public.”
Bronson’s solicitor had argued that denying a public hearing could result in “undue emotional stress” for the prisoner, who has long sought to lay bare what he believes to be flaws in the parole process. His legal team also asserted that Bronson “believes that his risk has significantly reduced” and that the public would benefit from a transparent discussion of his rehabilitation and ongoing risk management.
In response, Mr Roberts acknowledged the public interest in understanding how the parole process operates and agreed that the board has made “great efforts” in recent years to improve transparency. However, he stressed that public hearings remain “time-consuming and expensive” and should only be held when there is a clear benefit to public understanding or victim support.
He added that Bronson’s desire for a public hearing may also be partially driven by his desire to maintain or enhance his notoriety. The panel chair expressed concern that Bronson might use the platform “to air grievances publicly” or gain further media attention, which could detract from the actual substance of the hearing.
More Read
Despite this, Mr Roberts did not doubt Bronson’s sincerity in wanting to participate in the process, stating: “I am prepared to believe that his current intentions are entirely genuine even if (as is likely) there is an element of attention-seeking in his application.”
Concerns were also raised by the Ministry of Justice, which stated that Bronson’s “readiness to resort to violence continues to be evident” and suggested that a public setting could provoke disruptive behaviour not as likely to emerge in a private forum.
Mr Roberts ultimately concluded that holding the hearing in private was the most appropriate course of action, writing: “I believe that the notoriety which the prisoner has already achieved and which would no doubt be increased by holding this hearing in public might actually mitigate against better public understanding of the parole process.”
Bronson remains incarcerated under a discretionary life sentence, imposed in 2000 after he held a prison teacher hostage for nearly two days. This will be his ninth parole review, and the latest decision ensures that, for now at least, it will be heard away from the public eye.
