DANIEL MCCORMICK FROM BALLYMENA ESCAPES PRISON AFTER TRAIN KISS SCANDAL

In September 2021, Daniel McCormick, a resident of Ballymena, found himself in legal trouble once again, this time for failing to adhere to mandatory notification requirements as a registered sex offender. The incident that led to his latest conviction involved a breach of his obligation to update authorities about his current address, which he neglected to do in a timely manner.

McCormick, aged 28 and residing on Larne Road in Ballymena, appeared before Ballymena Magistrates Court via a video link from his solicitor’s office for sentencing. The court was informed that McCormick was subject to a series of legal obligations stemming from previous convictions, including the requirement to submit an annual declaration detailing his personal information, such as his address, until the year 2023. However, on September 8 of the previous year, he submitted this information four days late.

The prosecution outlined that police had made multiple attempts to contact McCormick to remind him of his legal duty to register his details. Despite leaving a calling card and making efforts to reach him, it was only after he made contact with the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) that he completed the required registration. McCormick admitted to the offence, which resulted in a fine of £100.

This case is part of a broader pattern of McCormick’s troubling history involving sexual offences. In January 2018, he appeared before Coleraine Magistrates Court, where he was given a probationary sentence after being convicted of grooming a 14-year-old girl. At that time, he was residing at Glenrosa Link in Belfast. The court heard that McCormick’s actions had deeply disturbed the girl’s parents, who were appalled by the way he groomed their daughter.

He was sentenced to two years’ probation, placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register for seven years, and subjected to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) for five years. These measures were part of a comprehensive effort to monitor and restrict his contact with minors.

Prior to this conviction, McCormick had been found guilty in his absence of two charges related to meeting a child following sexual grooming and engaging in sexual touching, both occurring in December 2015. The grooming charge involved communication with the girl on multiple occasions and meeting her without reasonably believing she was over 16. Police reports indicated that the girl, then 14, confided in her guardian about a “sexual relationship” with McCormick, which was corroborated by texts and CCTV footage showing the defendant and the girl boarding and sitting together on a train near Coleraine.

During police interviews, McCormick claimed he had gone to meet a friend and, by chance, encountered the girl, whom he then hugged and claimed to have put his hand on her leg. He admitted to kissing her on the train platform for about five minutes, asserting that the act was consensual. His defence argued that McCormick was “vulnerable” and that since 2015, he had not committed any further offences. They also noted that police had moved him from his accommodation due to threats against him.

The judge at Coleraine Magistrates Court acknowledged the seriousness of the offence but also recognized the efforts of the girl’s guardian, which may have prevented the situation from escalating further. The judge expressed that anyone hearing the facts, especially parents or grandparents, would immediately conclude that McCormick should be imprisoned. However, given that McCormick had accepted guilt, the court opted for a probationary sentence rather than immediate imprisonment, emphasizing the importance of preventing reoffending.

As part of his probation, McCormick was prohibited from having contact with children under 16 unless approved by social services or his designated risk manager. Additional restrictions included bans on internet use to contact minors and safeguards related to working with young people. The judge warned that any breach of these conditions would result in a four-month prison sentence.

At Ballymena Court, District Judge Nigel Broderick emphasized the importance of the notification regulations but noted that McCormick’s failure to update his address was minor and did not appear to be an attempt to frustrate the process. He concluded by fining McCormick £100, underscoring the importance of future compliance with all registration requirements.