JOHN MCCRICKERD FROM WORKINGTON GETS PRISON SENTENCE REDUCED IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASE
| Red Rose Database
Workington Child Sexual Abuser
In a recent development at the Court of Appeal, the nine-year prison sentence handed down to John McCrickerd, a resident of Vulcans Lane in Workington, has been shortened to seven years. The case, which drew significant attention, involved serious allegations of sexual misconduct against a young girl.
Back in October, McCrickerd, aged 46, was convicted at Carlisle Crown Court after he pleaded guilty to charges of gross indecency and three counts of sexual assault. The court heard that McCrickerd had developed an unhealthy infatuation with a girl, which initially manifested as arousal in her presence. This obsession led to a disturbing pattern of sexual abuse, including inappropriate touching, simulated sexual acts, and attempts to encourage the girl to perform a sexual act on him.
Following the conviction, McCrickerd’s legal team appealed the length of his sentence. The appeal was heard by judges Mr Justice Gross and Sir Robert Nelson, who ultimately decided to reduce the term from nine to seven years. During the hearing, Sir Robert Nelson explained that while the original sentencing judge was correct in recognizing the seriousness of the offences, the nine-year term was excessive. He pointed out that there are cases involving even more severe offences of this nature, and emphasized that McCrickerd’s willingness to admit guilt and show remorse played a role in the decision to lessen his sentence.
It was also noted that the victim chose not to participate further after initially reporting the abuse and withdrawing her complaint. The prosecution was able to proceed largely because McCrickerd himself approached social services and expressed his desire to surrender to the police. During his plea, McCrickerd stated that he did not have an attraction to other children, attempting to contextualize his actions.
Overall, the case highlights the complexities involved in sentencing for sexual offences, especially when the offender shows remorse and cooperates with authorities. The reduction in sentence reflects a nuanced judicial approach, balancing the severity of the crimes with the circumstances of the offender’s conduct and admissions.
Back in October, McCrickerd, aged 46, was convicted at Carlisle Crown Court after he pleaded guilty to charges of gross indecency and three counts of sexual assault. The court heard that McCrickerd had developed an unhealthy infatuation with a girl, which initially manifested as arousal in her presence. This obsession led to a disturbing pattern of sexual abuse, including inappropriate touching, simulated sexual acts, and attempts to encourage the girl to perform a sexual act on him.
Following the conviction, McCrickerd’s legal team appealed the length of his sentence. The appeal was heard by judges Mr Justice Gross and Sir Robert Nelson, who ultimately decided to reduce the term from nine to seven years. During the hearing, Sir Robert Nelson explained that while the original sentencing judge was correct in recognizing the seriousness of the offences, the nine-year term was excessive. He pointed out that there are cases involving even more severe offences of this nature, and emphasized that McCrickerd’s willingness to admit guilt and show remorse played a role in the decision to lessen his sentence.
It was also noted that the victim chose not to participate further after initially reporting the abuse and withdrawing her complaint. The prosecution was able to proceed largely because McCrickerd himself approached social services and expressed his desire to surrender to the police. During his plea, McCrickerd stated that he did not have an attraction to other children, attempting to contextualize his actions.
Overall, the case highlights the complexities involved in sentencing for sexual offences, especially when the offender shows remorse and cooperates with authorities. The reduction in sentence reflects a nuanced judicial approach, balancing the severity of the crimes with the circumstances of the offender’s conduct and admissions.