KIERAN DYER FROM TAMESIDE ESCAPES JAIL AFTER SEX OFFENDER BREACH IN BUXTON

In October 2018, a serious breach of a Sexual Offences Act notification order by Kieran Gareth Dyer, aged 37, was brought before Chesterfield magistrates’ court. Dyer, who resides in Tameside, narrowly avoided immediate imprisonment after failing to inform police of an address where he spent time with a child, raising concerns about compliance with his legal obligations under the Sexual Offences Act.

During the court proceedings on October 10, it was revealed that Dyer is subject to a notification order requiring him to notify police of his residence in Buxton, where he also spends time and where a child resides. The court heard that Dyer had previously breached the requirements of the Sexual Offences Act register on two separate occasions, which added to the seriousness of his current failure to comply.

His defence solicitor, Rebecca Wrack, explained that Dyer had recently moved back to live with his mother, who is awaiting a heart operation. She stated that his return was motivated by a desire to support his mother during her medical treatment. Miss Wrack acknowledged Dyer’s past breaches but argued that he believed his risk level had been reduced, leading him to think he only needed to notify police once every 12 months. She added that when Dyer did make a notification, he was told he was two weeks late.

According to Miss Wrack, Dyer voluntarily approached the police station and admitted that he had an address where children were present, although they were not always there at the same time. Dyer, of Market Street, at Broad Bottom, Tameside, pleaded guilty to failing to comply with the notification requirements in 2017, specifically for not informing police of his whereabouts and the presence of children during that period.

In court, Dyer expressed remorse, stating, “He’s incredibly sorry and he put himself in this position. He deeply regrets it and considers it a lesson learned. He is aware of the risks involved.”

The probation service provided additional context, revealing that Dyer is being considered for psychotherapy due to a history of abuse and a lifelong belief that violence is normal. They emphasized that a custodial sentence would result in him losing his employment and his ability to care for his mother.

Furthermore, the court was informed that Dyer had previously breached a conditional discharge but had not violated a suspended prison sentence order, as the offence occurred before the order was imposed. District Judge Andrew Davison sentenced Dyer to 20 weeks in custody, suspended for 12 months. The sentence included a 16-week curfew and a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement. Dyer was also ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £115 and costs of £85.

Overall, the court’s decision reflected a balance between accountability and the recognition of Dyer’s circumstances, with the suspended sentence allowing him to avoid immediate imprisonment while imposing conditions aimed at rehabilitation and compliance.