MARK DYSON, LEICESTER'S DANGEROUS PAEDOPHILE, BREACHES COURT ORDER AT HAYMARKET SHOPPING CENTRE
| Red Rose Database
Leicester Sexual Abuser
In February 2014, Leicester Crown Court heard a disturbing case involving Mark Dyson, a man branded as a 'dangerous predatory paedophile,' who was found to have violated a court-imposed sex offences prevention order. Dyson, aged 50 and residing on Glenfield Road in Leicester, was caught in breach of this order after he was seen accompanying a five-year-old girl at Leicester's busy Haymarket shopping centre.
Although there was no evidence to suggest that Dyson had harmed the young girl, his presence with her was a clear violation of the restrictions placed upon him. The court was informed that Dyson was under a legal ban from being in the company of children without explicit permission, a restriction that he had knowingly breached.
The incident came to light when an individual who knew Dyson recognized him with the young girl and promptly alerted the police. Authorities responded swiftly, checking Dyson’s residence to ensure the child was not present there. Meanwhile, Dyson initially denied being with the girl at the shopping centre, but CCTV footage later confirmed his involvement, exposing his falsehood.
At the time of the court proceedings, it was also revealed that Dyson had a lengthy and troubling criminal history. In 1998, he was sentenced to 16 years in prison for a series of serious offences, including two counts of rape, two attempted rapes, indecent assaults, and gross indecency involving at least three victims under the ages of 14 and 16. This background underscored the gravity of his current breach and the potential risk he posed.
Dyson admitted to breaching the sexual offences prevention order by having contact with the five-year-old girl. Additionally, he confessed to failing to notify the police of his current address, which is a requirement under the sex offender register regulations. His actions prompted a stern response from the court.
Judge Michael Pert QC delivered a firm sentence, stating, “After two releases on licence, you ended up serving the full term after being recalled because of your conduct during the licence period. I regard you as a very dangerous predatory paedophile. The reason the order is in place is because you can’t be trusted to have innocent relations with people who have children.”
The court also heard that someone who knew Dyson had observed him with the young girl and had contacted the police. The police then checked Dyson’s home, confirming that the child was not there at the time. The court was told that Dyson had lied about his involvement at the shopping centre until CCTV footage proved otherwise.
In mitigation, Jodie Woodward explained that Dyson had been assisting the girl’s father, who had mobility difficulties. She stated that Dyson felt unable to disclose his past to the father, fearing repercussions, which contributed to his decision to lie about his whereabouts.
Ultimately, the court sentenced Dyson to two years and two months in prison for breaching the court order, reflecting the seriousness with which the justice system views violations of protective orders and the potential danger posed by individuals with such criminal backgrounds.
Although there was no evidence to suggest that Dyson had harmed the young girl, his presence with her was a clear violation of the restrictions placed upon him. The court was informed that Dyson was under a legal ban from being in the company of children without explicit permission, a restriction that he had knowingly breached.
The incident came to light when an individual who knew Dyson recognized him with the young girl and promptly alerted the police. Authorities responded swiftly, checking Dyson’s residence to ensure the child was not present there. Meanwhile, Dyson initially denied being with the girl at the shopping centre, but CCTV footage later confirmed his involvement, exposing his falsehood.
At the time of the court proceedings, it was also revealed that Dyson had a lengthy and troubling criminal history. In 1998, he was sentenced to 16 years in prison for a series of serious offences, including two counts of rape, two attempted rapes, indecent assaults, and gross indecency involving at least three victims under the ages of 14 and 16. This background underscored the gravity of his current breach and the potential risk he posed.
Dyson admitted to breaching the sexual offences prevention order by having contact with the five-year-old girl. Additionally, he confessed to failing to notify the police of his current address, which is a requirement under the sex offender register regulations. His actions prompted a stern response from the court.
Judge Michael Pert QC delivered a firm sentence, stating, “After two releases on licence, you ended up serving the full term after being recalled because of your conduct during the licence period. I regard you as a very dangerous predatory paedophile. The reason the order is in place is because you can’t be trusted to have innocent relations with people who have children.”
The court also heard that someone who knew Dyson had observed him with the young girl and had contacted the police. The police then checked Dyson’s home, confirming that the child was not there at the time. The court was told that Dyson had lied about his involvement at the shopping centre until CCTV footage proved otherwise.
In mitigation, Jodie Woodward explained that Dyson had been assisting the girl’s father, who had mobility difficulties. She stated that Dyson felt unable to disclose his past to the father, fearing repercussions, which contributed to his decision to lie about his whereabouts.
Ultimately, the court sentenced Dyson to two years and two months in prison for breaching the court order, reflecting the seriousness with which the justice system views violations of protective orders and the potential danger posed by individuals with such criminal backgrounds.