JACK BENFIELD BREACHES LAINDON COURT ORDER IN SHOCKING INCIDENT

In May 2010, a serious breach of a court-imposed order involving a known sex offender occurred in Laindon, raising concerns about public safety and the effectiveness of existing legal restrictions. Jack Benfield, aged 69, who had previously been convicted of sexual offences, was found to have violated a court order by allowing a young girl to enter his residence on Cromer Avenue without proper authorization.

Benfield had been subjected to a sexual offences prevention order following his admission to charges of sexual assault and inciting a minor to engage in sexual activity with a seven-year-old girl in May 2008. As part of his sentencing, he was required to register as a sex offender and was given a 42-week prison sentence, suspended for two years. The court also imposed a condition that prohibited him from having contact with children unless accompanied by their parents or guardians, and mandated that he disclose any previous convictions if he encountered children and their families.

However, on February 18, Benfield contravened this order by permitting a ten-year-old girl to enter his home. The girl was accompanied by her mother and grandmother at the time, but Benfield failed to inform them of his prior conviction. The incident was witnessed by probation officers, who observed the girl entering the property. Following this breach, Benfield was promptly arrested and taken into police custody for questioning.

He appeared before Basildon Crown Court, where he faced potential charges that could have resulted in up to five years of imprisonment for the breach. Despite the gravity of the situation, Recorder John Caudle decided to impose a suspended sentence of seven weeks, considering that Benfield had not invited the group into his home and was unaware of their arrival. The court was informed that the girl was not left alone with Benfield, and that he had been completely honest with police during his interview.

Recorder Caudle expressed understanding that Benfield did not know the visitors were coming and acknowledged the distress he might have experienced upon seeing the child at his doorstep. He emphasized the importance of adhering to the conditions of the sexual offences prevention order in the future. The judge also reminded Benfield of his previous conviction for a sexual offence against a young girl in 1970, urging him to ensure he remains law-abiding and avoids further court appearances.