DANIEL JOHNSON'S CRIMINAL PAST IN WARRINGTON: SEX OFFENDER'S REHAB AND LATEST OFFENSES
| Red Rose Database
Warrington Child Sexual Abuser
In April 2013, Daniel Johnson, a man with a troubling history in Warrington, was released from prison and has since been residing in the Latchford area of Warrington. His return to the community has raised concerns given his previous convictions and the serious nature of his past offenses.
Back in December 2010, Johnson faced a significant legal judgment at Warrington Crown Court. He was convicted of serious sexual offenses involving a 15-year-old girl, whom he had lured into a pattern of abuse that included providing her with alcohol and cocaine. The court heard that Johnson, aged 38 at the time, was a father of three and had a history of criminal behavior, having served time previously for unrelated crimes.
The prosecution, led by Simon Medland, detailed how Johnson gradually became involved in the victim’s life. He would take her out on trips and give her lifts, creating a sense of familiarity and trust. However, this relationship took a dark turn in November 2008, when Johnson began to exploit her vulnerability for his own gratification. The court described how Johnson insinuated himself into her life in an unexpected manner, with the intent of establishing a sexual relationship. Medland emphasized that Johnson’s mindset was that the girl could potentially be a partner for sexual activity, which was a disturbing revelation.
The situation escalated in December 2008 when Johnson booked a hotel in Northwich. The court described the event as both frightening and somewhat confusing for the young girl, who was unsure whether she was willing or unwilling. It became clear that Johnson’s expectations exceeded her comfort level. During this hotel stay, he brought beer and cocaine, further complicating the situation. The girl attempted to avoid the situation by claiming she was trying to get signal or by going downstairs to smoke cigarettes, but Johnson’s actions culminated in him having sex with her that night.
Warrington Crown Court was told that Johnson was the driving force behind the relationship, and the victim expressed feelings of distress and upset about what was happening. She confided to police that they had engaged in sexual activity on numerous occasions, which she found upsetting. Despite Johnson’s claims that he did not have sex with her while she was underage, his guilty pleas indicated that he was aware of her age and still proceeded with the acts.
During the trial, the court learned that Johnson had prior convictions and had served time in prison before, although for crimes unrelated to this case. His defense attorney, Jeremy Rawson, argued that Johnson was responsible for caring for two of his three children, who would be living with his parents, both in their 70s, during his incarceration and after his release.
Judge Thomas Teague addressed the court, describing Johnson’s infatuation with the girl and noting that if she had been 16, the offenses might not have been committed. The judge highlighted the significant age gap, stating that Johnson was well over twice her age, and emphasized the breach of trust involved in the case. As part of his sentence, Johnson was ordered to remain on the sex offenders’ register for life and was prohibited from having unsupervised contact with anyone under 16, except for his own children.
Johnson’s case remains a stark reminder of the dangers of exploiting vulnerable minors and the importance of strict legal measures to protect young people from predatory behavior.
Back in December 2010, Johnson faced a significant legal judgment at Warrington Crown Court. He was convicted of serious sexual offenses involving a 15-year-old girl, whom he had lured into a pattern of abuse that included providing her with alcohol and cocaine. The court heard that Johnson, aged 38 at the time, was a father of three and had a history of criminal behavior, having served time previously for unrelated crimes.
The prosecution, led by Simon Medland, detailed how Johnson gradually became involved in the victim’s life. He would take her out on trips and give her lifts, creating a sense of familiarity and trust. However, this relationship took a dark turn in November 2008, when Johnson began to exploit her vulnerability for his own gratification. The court described how Johnson insinuated himself into her life in an unexpected manner, with the intent of establishing a sexual relationship. Medland emphasized that Johnson’s mindset was that the girl could potentially be a partner for sexual activity, which was a disturbing revelation.
The situation escalated in December 2008 when Johnson booked a hotel in Northwich. The court described the event as both frightening and somewhat confusing for the young girl, who was unsure whether she was willing or unwilling. It became clear that Johnson’s expectations exceeded her comfort level. During this hotel stay, he brought beer and cocaine, further complicating the situation. The girl attempted to avoid the situation by claiming she was trying to get signal or by going downstairs to smoke cigarettes, but Johnson’s actions culminated in him having sex with her that night.
Warrington Crown Court was told that Johnson was the driving force behind the relationship, and the victim expressed feelings of distress and upset about what was happening. She confided to police that they had engaged in sexual activity on numerous occasions, which she found upsetting. Despite Johnson’s claims that he did not have sex with her while she was underage, his guilty pleas indicated that he was aware of her age and still proceeded with the acts.
During the trial, the court learned that Johnson had prior convictions and had served time in prison before, although for crimes unrelated to this case. His defense attorney, Jeremy Rawson, argued that Johnson was responsible for caring for two of his three children, who would be living with his parents, both in their 70s, during his incarceration and after his release.
Judge Thomas Teague addressed the court, describing Johnson’s infatuation with the girl and noting that if she had been 16, the offenses might not have been committed. The judge highlighted the significant age gap, stating that Johnson was well over twice her age, and emphasized the breach of trust involved in the case. As part of his sentence, Johnson was ordered to remain on the sex offenders’ register for life and was prohibited from having unsupervised contact with anyone under 16, except for his own children.
Johnson’s case remains a stark reminder of the dangers of exploiting vulnerable minors and the importance of strict legal measures to protect young people from predatory behavior.