GRACE ALLEN FROM GRIMSTON SENTENCED FOR SEXUAL OFFENSES INVOLVING 15-YEAR-OLD BOY AT NORWICH CROWN COURT
| Red Rose Database
Grimston Child Sexual Abuser
In a case that has shocked the local community of Grimston, Grace Allen, a 35-year-old woman and a family support worker, was sentenced to prison after admitting to engaging in sexual activities with a minor. The incident came to light in September 2008, when Allen appeared before Norwich Crown Court to face charges related to her inappropriate relationship with a 15-year-old boy.
Allen, whose address was listed as Hazel Close, Grimston, was found guilty of three counts of sexual activity with the youth, who was a minor at the time of the offenses. The court heard that she was sentenced to 15 months in prison, with a subsequent ten-year registration on the sex offenders' register. Additionally, she was permanently barred from working with children, a measure intended to prevent any future risk to minors.
During the proceedings, the court was informed that the relationship between Allen and the boy was consensual, with the prosecution emphasizing that the teenager was a willing participant. Lori Tucker, the prosecutor, explained that the case was uncovered after the boy’s father discovered sexually explicit text messages and nude photographs on his son’s mobile phone. This discovery prompted an investigation that revealed an ongoing relationship between Allen and the youth.
Initially, Allen apologized and claimed that she and the boy had only been talking, kissing, and cuddling, denying any sexual activity. However, the boy later confided in his mother that their relationship had escalated to full sexual encounters. The court was told that Allen admitted to having multiple liaisons with the boy when she was arrested, expressing that she was flattered by his attraction to her.
Throughout the hearing, it was noted that Allen was of previously good character, and the court acknowledged that the boy was a willing participant. The prosecutor highlighted the emotional toll on the boy’s parents, who were described as being “terribly upset” by the revelations. Allen’s defense lawyer, Neil Guest, described her as an “excellent mother” who was overwhelmed with remorse. He also mentioned that she had attempted to take her own life and had suffered a loss of reputation and self-respect due to the incident.
Despite her remorse, the court emphasized the seriousness of the offense. Judge Peter Jacobs addressed Allen directly, stating, “You were told to back off but you did not do so.” He pointed out that both Allen’s relationship with the boy and her own personal relationships had suffered as a result. The judge remarked that if the roles had been reversed—if a 35-year-old man had engaged in similar conduct with a 15-year-old girl—public opinion would likely be less forgiving and imprisonment would be expected.
The judge also noted that the relationship had caused a breakdown in the boy’s relationship with his parents and that Allen’s own relationship had also suffered. As the court proceedings concluded, Allen collapsed in the courtroom, and the hearing was subsequently adjourned. The case underscores the gravity of such offenses and the legal system’s stance on protecting minors from exploitation and abuse.
Allen, whose address was listed as Hazel Close, Grimston, was found guilty of three counts of sexual activity with the youth, who was a minor at the time of the offenses. The court heard that she was sentenced to 15 months in prison, with a subsequent ten-year registration on the sex offenders' register. Additionally, she was permanently barred from working with children, a measure intended to prevent any future risk to minors.
During the proceedings, the court was informed that the relationship between Allen and the boy was consensual, with the prosecution emphasizing that the teenager was a willing participant. Lori Tucker, the prosecutor, explained that the case was uncovered after the boy’s father discovered sexually explicit text messages and nude photographs on his son’s mobile phone. This discovery prompted an investigation that revealed an ongoing relationship between Allen and the youth.
Initially, Allen apologized and claimed that she and the boy had only been talking, kissing, and cuddling, denying any sexual activity. However, the boy later confided in his mother that their relationship had escalated to full sexual encounters. The court was told that Allen admitted to having multiple liaisons with the boy when she was arrested, expressing that she was flattered by his attraction to her.
Throughout the hearing, it was noted that Allen was of previously good character, and the court acknowledged that the boy was a willing participant. The prosecutor highlighted the emotional toll on the boy’s parents, who were described as being “terribly upset” by the revelations. Allen’s defense lawyer, Neil Guest, described her as an “excellent mother” who was overwhelmed with remorse. He also mentioned that she had attempted to take her own life and had suffered a loss of reputation and self-respect due to the incident.
Despite her remorse, the court emphasized the seriousness of the offense. Judge Peter Jacobs addressed Allen directly, stating, “You were told to back off but you did not do so.” He pointed out that both Allen’s relationship with the boy and her own personal relationships had suffered as a result. The judge remarked that if the roles had been reversed—if a 35-year-old man had engaged in similar conduct with a 15-year-old girl—public opinion would likely be less forgiving and imprisonment would be expected.
The judge also noted that the relationship had caused a breakdown in the boy’s relationship with his parents and that Allen’s own relationship had also suffered. As the court proceedings concluded, Allen collapsed in the courtroom, and the hearing was subsequently adjourned. The case underscores the gravity of such offenses and the legal system’s stance on protecting minors from exploitation and abuse.