DANNY HARRIS SENTENCED IN YORK FOR SEXUAL GROOMING OF TEENAGE GIRL
In December 2016, a disturbing case unfolded in York involving Danny Harris, a man who engaged in inappropriate and predatory behavior towards a 13-year-old girl.Harris, who was twice her age at the time, relentlessly pursued her through social media, specifically Facebook, bombarding her with messages that contained vulgar and crude suggestions.
His actions drew the attention of the authorities and led to a serious legal response.
Prosecutor Michele Stuart-Lofthouse outlined the details of the case during the proceedings at York Crown Court.
She revealed that Harris was aware of the girl’s underage status but continued his inappropriate conduct nonetheless.
Among the evidence presented was a photograph Harris sent to the girl, depicting himself in his underwear, accompanied by comments expressing his desire to engage in sexual activity with her.
Despite the explicit nature of his messages, the pair only met once in person, and no sexual activity took place during that encounter.
The girl, recognizing the inappropriate nature of Harris’s advances and understanding her own vulnerability, chose to cease communication after approximately two months of exchanges.
The court was shown a transcript of the messages exchanged between Harris and the girl, which spanned an extensive 180 pages.
The exchanges were initiated by Harris, who appeared to become increasingly infatuated with the young girl, despite knowing her age.
Judge Paul Batty QC, the Honorary Recorder of York, addressed Harris directly during the sentencing.
He emphasized the gravity of Harris’s actions, stating, “You bombarded her with Facebook messages.
In fact, you were twice her age and it would appear you became utterly infatuated with her.” Harris, who was residing on Kitchen Drive in Selby at the time, pleaded guilty to the charge of meeting a child after sexual grooming, just before his trial was set to commence.
His plea and the evidence against him resulted in a two-year prison sentence, which was suspended for two years.
As part of his sentence, Harris was subjected to several conditions, including a nightly curfew from 7 pm to 7 am for four months and the completion of 60 days of rehabilitative activities aimed at addressing his behavior.
Furthermore, Harris was placed on the sex offenders’ register and was subject to a sexual harm prevention order.
This order restricts his interactions and behavior towards children, and both the register and the order are set to remain in effect for ten years, reflecting the serious nature of his offenses and the ongoing risk he poses to the community.
