DANIEL CARTER FROM WEYMOUTH FACES SERIOUS CHARGES AT DORCHESTER CROWN COURT
| Red Rose Database
Weymouth Child Sexual Abuser
In February 2013, Daniel Carter, a 39-year-old man from Weymouth, was brought before Dorchester Crown Court to face serious allegations related to voyeurism and the creation of indecent images of minors. The proceedings followed a disturbing discovery made earlier that year when Carter’s then-wife uncovered explicit images on his computer, revealing a troubling pattern of behavior.
According to prosecutor Anita Gibson-Lee, the offending was exposed in April when Carter’s wife found approximately 20 images depicting a naked female. These images were taken without the girl’s knowledge or consent, and they included both photographs and videos. The victim was identified, and authorities were able to determine that 16 of these images—comprising four videos and 12 photographs—were taken before her 18th birthday, which formed the basis for the criminal charges against Carter.
When police arrested Carter on suspicion of these offences, he responded with a simple acknowledgment, saying, “Yes that’s right.” During police interviews, he offered little comment but later pleaded guilty to the charges when he appeared in court in October. His guilty plea included one count of voyeurism and 16 counts of making indecent images of children.
In his defense, Tim Shorter, representing Carter, emphasized his client’s previously good character, noting that Carter had recently suffered significant personal losses, including the end of his marriage and the loss of his employment. He stated, “There is no doubt in my mind that he realises just how wrong his actions were and how damaging they were to the victim. He acknowledges his behaviour was completely unacceptable.”
Judge Roger Jarvis delivered the sentence, which included a three-year community order with supervision and a requirement for Carter to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders’ Programme. The judge condemned Carter’s conduct as “utterly disgraceful” and referenced a statement detailing the profound impact his actions had on the young victim. The judge remarked, “Plain it is she was shocked by what happened to her – it has had a profound effect upon her. I hope you are truly ashamed of yourself.”
Furthermore, Carter was placed on the sex offenders’ register for seven years and was subject to an indefinite Sexual Offences Prevention Order. The court’s actions reflect the seriousness with which these offences are regarded, emphasizing the need for ongoing monitoring and rehabilitation.
Earlier, in October 2012, Carter had already been warned that he could face imprisonment for his offences. During that hearing, he admitted to 16 counts of making indecent images of children and a charge of voyeurism, with the offences committed between October 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011. Prosecutor Anita Gibson-Lee highlighted Carter’s previously good character but noted the gravity of his actions.
The case was adjourned for a pre-sentence report, and Carter was released on conditional bail until his sentencing scheduled for November 16. Judge Jarvis cautioned Carter that “it is very possible that you will lose your liberty,” and he was automatically registered as a sex offender, with the duration to be determined at sentencing.
According to prosecutor Anita Gibson-Lee, the offending was exposed in April when Carter’s wife found approximately 20 images depicting a naked female. These images were taken without the girl’s knowledge or consent, and they included both photographs and videos. The victim was identified, and authorities were able to determine that 16 of these images—comprising four videos and 12 photographs—were taken before her 18th birthday, which formed the basis for the criminal charges against Carter.
When police arrested Carter on suspicion of these offences, he responded with a simple acknowledgment, saying, “Yes that’s right.” During police interviews, he offered little comment but later pleaded guilty to the charges when he appeared in court in October. His guilty plea included one count of voyeurism and 16 counts of making indecent images of children.
In his defense, Tim Shorter, representing Carter, emphasized his client’s previously good character, noting that Carter had recently suffered significant personal losses, including the end of his marriage and the loss of his employment. He stated, “There is no doubt in my mind that he realises just how wrong his actions were and how damaging they were to the victim. He acknowledges his behaviour was completely unacceptable.”
Judge Roger Jarvis delivered the sentence, which included a three-year community order with supervision and a requirement for Carter to attend the Thames Valley Sex Offenders’ Programme. The judge condemned Carter’s conduct as “utterly disgraceful” and referenced a statement detailing the profound impact his actions had on the young victim. The judge remarked, “Plain it is she was shocked by what happened to her – it has had a profound effect upon her. I hope you are truly ashamed of yourself.”
Furthermore, Carter was placed on the sex offenders’ register for seven years and was subject to an indefinite Sexual Offences Prevention Order. The court’s actions reflect the seriousness with which these offences are regarded, emphasizing the need for ongoing monitoring and rehabilitation.
Earlier, in October 2012, Carter had already been warned that he could face imprisonment for his offences. During that hearing, he admitted to 16 counts of making indecent images of children and a charge of voyeurism, with the offences committed between October 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011. Prosecutor Anita Gibson-Lee highlighted Carter’s previously good character but noted the gravity of his actions.
The case was adjourned for a pre-sentence report, and Carter was released on conditional bail until his sentencing scheduled for November 16. Judge Jarvis cautioned Carter that “it is very possible that you will lose your liberty,” and he was automatically registered as a sex offender, with the duration to be determined at sentencing.