DAVID WARD FROM IPSWICH AND WOODBRIDGE FACES TEN-YEAR ORDER OVER GROOMING FEARS

In March 2011, a serious case involving a convicted sex offender unfolded in the courts, highlighting ongoing concerns about community safety and the potential for reoffending. David Ward, a 63-year-old man with ties to both Ipswich and Woodbridge, was brought before magistrates following allegations that he posed a significant risk to children and their families.

Ward, who resides on Bridgewood Road in Woodbridge, has a troubling criminal history, including a previous nine-year prison sentence for sexual offences committed against minors. His past convictions and current behavior prompted authorities to seek a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO), a legal measure designed to restrict the activities of individuals deemed high risk to the community.

The case came to light after police officers from public protection units conducted a visit to Ward’s residence on July 7 of the previous year. During this visit, they discovered a birthday card from a young boy and his mother, which was signed affectionately with the words “with love” from both the mother and her son. This discovery raised immediate concerns about Ward’s interactions with minors and his potential grooming behavior.

Ward, who previously lived in Ipswich, initially claimed that he had met the boy’s mother while out walking his dog and insisted that the child was 14 years old. However, the mother later approached police to report that Ward had disclosed to her that he was on the Sex Offenders’ Register, and that her son was actually only 12 years old, not 14 as Ward had claimed. She also revealed that Ward had visited their home, had been involved in child-minding activities with her son, and had even offered the boy the opportunity to stay at his residence.

Following a thorough assessment, authorities classified Ward as a high-risk individual capable of causing significant harm to the community. Law enforcement officials expressed particular concern that Ward was actively creating opportunities to offend against young boys. They were especially worried that he had failed to disclose his previous convictions, which could have enabled him to groom her son or other children in his social circle.

The primary motivation for applying for the SOPO was the fear that Ward might commit further offences. The court was informed that without restrictions, Ward’s behavior could escalate, putting more children at risk. As a result, magistrates approved the order, imposing strict conditions on Ward’s activities.

These conditions prohibit Ward from residing in the same household as any child under 18 and forbid him from having unsupervised contact with anyone under that age, except during normal daily routines. Additionally, Ward is barred from working with or participating in organized activities involving minors, and he is not permitted to be alone in a vehicle with a child under 18.

Ward’s criminal record includes a conviction from Luton Crown Court in 1997 for child sex offences. He was sentenced to 12 years in prison, though this was reduced to nine years on appeal. The offences took place in Hitchin, and he was ordered to register as a sex offender indefinitely. These prior convictions underscore the ongoing concerns about his potential to reoffend and the importance of the restrictions now placed upon him.