MICHAEL HILL'S SHOCKING SEX ABUSE IN LINGFIELD AND SUSSEX REVEALED IN COURT
| Red Rose Database
Lingfield Child Sexual Abuser
In a harrowing case that has sent shockwaves through the community, Michael Hill, a former priest with ties to Lingfield, was sentenced to five years in prison for a series of heinous sexual offenses committed against young boys. The Old Bailey courtroom heard detailed accounts of Hill’s predatory behavior, which spanned nearly two decades, and the devastating impact it has had on his victims.
Judge Christopher Moss did not hold back in his condemnation of Hill, describing him as “a practising and predatory paedophile who exploited the vestments of priesthood to conceal his true nature.” The judge emphasized the calculated nature of Hill’s crimes, noting that he employed significant planning and deception to gain the trust of both the children and their parents. “There is no greater breach of trust,” Judge Moss stated, “than that committed by someone who is supposed to be a spiritual guide.”
Hill, aged 68, pleaded guilty to six counts of indecent assault involving three boys aged between 10 and 14 years old. The court was told that these offenses took place over a period from 1969 to 1987. Hill showed no visible emotion as he was led away to the cells following the sentencing. It was also revealed that he resigned from the priesthood in 1996 and is likely to be asked to leave the Roman Catholic Church entirely.
This case is not Hill’s first brush with the law. In 1997, he was previously sentenced to five years after being convicted of ten offenses against eight boys. The judge pointed out that the combined duration of Hill’s offending, including the current charges, amounted to nearly twenty years of abuse. Hill himself admitted to deriving sexual gratification from having boys around him, and at one point, he expressed the belief that children sometimes enjoyed sexual contact with adults.
The court heard that Hill’s criminal activities extended across Sussex and Surrey, where he worked in various capacities, including as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport. His move from Godalming in 1980 was prompted by complaints about his inappropriate conduct towards children. Despite receiving psycho-therapy in 1981 at a church-run facility in Heathfield, Hill continued to offend, committing two assaults during that period. After leaving his parish in 1983, he underwent further treatment at a church center while temporarily suspended from duties.
In January 1985, Hill was appointed as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport, a position that gave him access to vulnerable children, including a 13-year-old boy in a wheelchair. Hill admitted to police that he had touched the boy under a duvet. It was also revealed that Hill had previously received a police caution in 1986 for indecent assault on a male, although details of that incident were not disclosed during the trial. The court was told that Hill’s manipulation extended to gaining the trust of parents, who were flattered by his attention. His offenses often involved tucking boys into bed, toweling them after baths, and taking them on excursions, including visits to his own home.
Following his arrest, Hill told police that his actions were not only illegal but also immoral. The impact on his victims has been profound, with many suffering from behavioral issues, doubts about their sexuality, and difficulties forming relationships. Some have turned to alcohol as a coping mechanism.
In light of the case, the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, issued a public apology to Hill’s victims. The Cardinal expressed deep regret for the damage caused and acknowledged that his earlier decision to appoint Hill as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport in 1985, after receiving conflicting psychiatric reports, was a mistake. He also denied accusations of turning a blind eye to paedophilia issues within the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton during his tenure there.
Hill’s defense lawyer, Tony Loader, appealed for the judge to consider suspending the sentence rather than imposing immediate imprisonment, citing Hill’s poor health and heart problems. However, Judge Moss firmly disagreed, stating that had the full extent of Hill’s offending been known during his 1997 sentencing, the punishment would have been significantly harsher.
Outside the court, Detective Constable Mike Selcon expressed satisfaction with the outcome, stating, “It is a just result for the crimes Hill has committed. I believe the victims have had justice. I am very pleased with this outcome, particularly for the victims who I hope can now put this matter to rest and get on with the rest of their lives. I am impressed with their bravery throughout what has been a very traumatic process.”
Judge Christopher Moss did not hold back in his condemnation of Hill, describing him as “a practising and predatory paedophile who exploited the vestments of priesthood to conceal his true nature.” The judge emphasized the calculated nature of Hill’s crimes, noting that he employed significant planning and deception to gain the trust of both the children and their parents. “There is no greater breach of trust,” Judge Moss stated, “than that committed by someone who is supposed to be a spiritual guide.”
Hill, aged 68, pleaded guilty to six counts of indecent assault involving three boys aged between 10 and 14 years old. The court was told that these offenses took place over a period from 1969 to 1987. Hill showed no visible emotion as he was led away to the cells following the sentencing. It was also revealed that he resigned from the priesthood in 1996 and is likely to be asked to leave the Roman Catholic Church entirely.
This case is not Hill’s first brush with the law. In 1997, he was previously sentenced to five years after being convicted of ten offenses against eight boys. The judge pointed out that the combined duration of Hill’s offending, including the current charges, amounted to nearly twenty years of abuse. Hill himself admitted to deriving sexual gratification from having boys around him, and at one point, he expressed the belief that children sometimes enjoyed sexual contact with adults.
The court heard that Hill’s criminal activities extended across Sussex and Surrey, where he worked in various capacities, including as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport. His move from Godalming in 1980 was prompted by complaints about his inappropriate conduct towards children. Despite receiving psycho-therapy in 1981 at a church-run facility in Heathfield, Hill continued to offend, committing two assaults during that period. After leaving his parish in 1983, he underwent further treatment at a church center while temporarily suspended from duties.
In January 1985, Hill was appointed as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport, a position that gave him access to vulnerable children, including a 13-year-old boy in a wheelchair. Hill admitted to police that he had touched the boy under a duvet. It was also revealed that Hill had previously received a police caution in 1986 for indecent assault on a male, although details of that incident were not disclosed during the trial. The court was told that Hill’s manipulation extended to gaining the trust of parents, who were flattered by his attention. His offenses often involved tucking boys into bed, toweling them after baths, and taking them on excursions, including visits to his own home.
Following his arrest, Hill told police that his actions were not only illegal but also immoral. The impact on his victims has been profound, with many suffering from behavioral issues, doubts about their sexuality, and difficulties forming relationships. Some have turned to alcohol as a coping mechanism.
In light of the case, the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, issued a public apology to Hill’s victims. The Cardinal expressed deep regret for the damage caused and acknowledged that his earlier decision to appoint Hill as a chaplain at Gatwick Airport in 1985, after receiving conflicting psychiatric reports, was a mistake. He also denied accusations of turning a blind eye to paedophilia issues within the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton during his tenure there.
Hill’s defense lawyer, Tony Loader, appealed for the judge to consider suspending the sentence rather than imposing immediate imprisonment, citing Hill’s poor health and heart problems. However, Judge Moss firmly disagreed, stating that had the full extent of Hill’s offending been known during his 1997 sentencing, the punishment would have been significantly harsher.
Outside the court, Detective Constable Mike Selcon expressed satisfaction with the outcome, stating, “It is a just result for the crimes Hill has committed. I believe the victims have had justice. I am very pleased with this outcome, particularly for the victims who I hope can now put this matter to rest and get on with the rest of their lives. I am impressed with their bravery throughout what has been a very traumatic process.”