DAVID HOLMES FAREHAM SPINE SPECIALIST CONVICTED OF INDECENT ASSAULT IN SOUTHAMPTON

In July 2003, a prominent spine specialist from Fareham, David Holmes, faced a court in Southampton where he was convicted of indecent assault on a young girl. Despite his reputation as a world-renowned medical professional, Holmes was sentenced to a six-month jail term, which was suspended, and was also ordered to register as a sex offender. The court's decision was influenced by his significant contributions to society, which the judge acknowledged during the sentencing.

Holmes, aged 60 at the time, had worked at Southampton General Hospital and Princess Anne Hospital in Southampton. His career spanned over four decades, during which he became a pioneer in the field of spinal treatment, notably developing a revolutionary spinal brace that gained recognition in the medical community. His work was considered groundbreaking and highly beneficial to many patients.

The incident for which Holmes was convicted occurred sometime between 1992 and 1996, during a medical examination of a girl who was then between 12 and 16 years old. Holmes claimed that the examination was necessary, but a prosecution expert disagreed, asserting that the examination was inappropriate. The girl, now aged 22, and her mother did not report the incident until 2002, after Holmes was publicly investigated by police. Holmes was also tried on three additional charges of indecent assault but was acquitted of those.

The court proceedings in Southampton Crown Court drew significant public attention. When the verdict was announced in May, there were audible gasps and tears from the gallery, reflecting the shock and disappointment of many in attendance. The conviction marked a tragic end to Holmes’s distinguished medical career.

Holmes, who resided on Gudge Heath Lane in Fareham, was described by his defense as a highly valued medical professional whose contributions had positively impacted many lives. His legal representative, Matthew Farmer, argued that Holmes’s overall contribution to society was outstanding and that his momentary lapse should not overshadow his lifelong achievements. Farmer requested that the court consider a non-custodial sentence, emphasizing Holmes’s positive reputation and the good work he had done.

However, Judge David Griffiths acknowledged the seriousness of the offense, especially given Holmes’s role in treating vulnerable children. The judge stated, “It seems to me that a prison sentence is called for to reflect those aggravating features.” Nonetheless, considering the circumstances, the judge decided to suspend the sentence, allowing Holmes to avoid immediate imprisonment. Holmes was also ordered to pay costs amounting to £5,000.

This case remains a stark reminder of the complex balance courts must strike between acknowledging a person’s contributions to society and addressing the gravity of criminal conduct, especially when it involves vulnerable individuals.