CHELTENHAM SEX OFFENDER DAVID ROBERTS ESCAPES JAIL AFTER THREE DECADES OF SILENCE
| Red Rose Database
Cheltenham Sexual Abuser
In a notable case heard at Gloucester Crown Court, David Roberts, a 57-year-old man from Sinclair Road in Cheltenham, was spared immediate imprisonment despite admitting to serious historical sex offences. The court was informed that Roberts had committed no further crimes since the incidents, which occurred over thirty years ago.
Roberts had pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent assault involving a girl under the age of 14. The court heard that these offences took place many years in the past, and since then, Roberts had maintained a clean record, with no subsequent criminal activity reported.
Judge William Hart addressed the court, emphasizing that Roberts had shown no signs of reoffending in the intervening years. The judge acknowledged the significant passage of time and the absence of recent offences, which led him to consider the case under exceptional circumstances. Judge Hart stated that Roberts could reasonably argue he was not the same person at the time of the offences as he was now.
As a result, the judge decided to impose a sentence that reflected both the seriousness of the crimes and the circumstances of the case. Roberts was sentenced to 18 months in prison, but this sentence was suspended for two years, meaning he would not serve time unless he committed another offence within that period. The sentences for each count were made concurrent.
Additionally, Roberts was ordered to sign the sex offender’s register for a period of ten years. The court also imposed a sexual offences prevention order (SOPO) for five years, which included specific conditions designed to prevent future offences. Among these conditions, Roberts was prohibited from residing in a household with anyone under 16, unless they were staying temporarily. These measures aimed to mitigate any potential risk and ensure ongoing supervision.
This case highlights the complexities involved in sentencing historical sex offences, especially when the offender has demonstrated a long period of good conduct and the court considers the circumstances exceptional.
Roberts had pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent assault involving a girl under the age of 14. The court heard that these offences took place many years in the past, and since then, Roberts had maintained a clean record, with no subsequent criminal activity reported.
Judge William Hart addressed the court, emphasizing that Roberts had shown no signs of reoffending in the intervening years. The judge acknowledged the significant passage of time and the absence of recent offences, which led him to consider the case under exceptional circumstances. Judge Hart stated that Roberts could reasonably argue he was not the same person at the time of the offences as he was now.
As a result, the judge decided to impose a sentence that reflected both the seriousness of the crimes and the circumstances of the case. Roberts was sentenced to 18 months in prison, but this sentence was suspended for two years, meaning he would not serve time unless he committed another offence within that period. The sentences for each count were made concurrent.
Additionally, Roberts was ordered to sign the sex offender’s register for a period of ten years. The court also imposed a sexual offences prevention order (SOPO) for five years, which included specific conditions designed to prevent future offences. Among these conditions, Roberts was prohibited from residing in a household with anyone under 16, unless they were staying temporarily. These measures aimed to mitigate any potential risk and ensure ongoing supervision.
This case highlights the complexities involved in sentencing historical sex offences, especially when the offender has demonstrated a long period of good conduct and the court considers the circumstances exceptional.