MICHAEL ROCHE FROM SHEERNESS JAILED FOR SEX OFFENCES INVOLVING YOUNG GIRLS
| Red Rose Database
Sheerness Sexual Abuser
In December 2014, a disturbing case emerged involving Michael Roche, a gym instructor and volunteer football coach from Sheerness, who was convicted of serious sexual offences against a young girl. Roche, residing on Alma Road in Sheerness, was found guilty by a jury at Maidstone Crown Court after denying two counts of sexual assault. The court heard that Roche had molested a young girl on two separate occasions in the year prior to his trial.
During the proceedings, the judge acknowledged that there was evidence of a third incident in which Roche, then 22 years old, engaged in a sexual assault that was carried out with intent. The judge described these acts as opportunistic, highlighting the predatory nature of the offences. Roche’s defense attorney, Richard Padley, argued for leniency, suggesting that a suspended sentence would be appropriate given Roche’s background and character.
Padley emphasized that Roche had left school at 17 after completing only the first year of A Levels. He had since worked as a gym instructor and dedicated time to voluntary activities, including coaching youth football teams for children aged eight to 18. The defense portrayed Roche as a person of good character, asserting that the offences were out of character and that Roche did not pose a threat to society. Padley described Roche as an asset to the community, emphasizing his extensive work with young people and his positive character traits. He argued that a suspended sentence would allow Roche to demonstrate his rehabilitation and future ambitions.
However, the presiding judge, Charles Macdonald QC, expressed serious concerns based on a pre-sentence report. The report classified Roche as a “statutory dangerous offender,” indicating a significant risk to the public, particularly young females. The judge criticized Roche for showing a lack of insight and remorse, noting his refusal to accept the jury’s verdicts. “I agree you are without insight and remorse, refusing to accept the verdicts,” Judge Macdonald stated. “You present a risk of serious harm to young females.”
Despite these concerns, the judge clarified that he lacked the authority to impose a public protection sentence. Roche was sentenced to three years in prison and will be required to register on the sex offenders’ register indefinitely. Additionally, a sexual offences prevention order was imposed for a period of 15 years, which prohibits Roche from working with children and vulnerable adults. The case underscores the ongoing challenges in balancing rehabilitation and public safety in cases involving sexual offences against minors.
During the proceedings, the judge acknowledged that there was evidence of a third incident in which Roche, then 22 years old, engaged in a sexual assault that was carried out with intent. The judge described these acts as opportunistic, highlighting the predatory nature of the offences. Roche’s defense attorney, Richard Padley, argued for leniency, suggesting that a suspended sentence would be appropriate given Roche’s background and character.
Padley emphasized that Roche had left school at 17 after completing only the first year of A Levels. He had since worked as a gym instructor and dedicated time to voluntary activities, including coaching youth football teams for children aged eight to 18. The defense portrayed Roche as a person of good character, asserting that the offences were out of character and that Roche did not pose a threat to society. Padley described Roche as an asset to the community, emphasizing his extensive work with young people and his positive character traits. He argued that a suspended sentence would allow Roche to demonstrate his rehabilitation and future ambitions.
However, the presiding judge, Charles Macdonald QC, expressed serious concerns based on a pre-sentence report. The report classified Roche as a “statutory dangerous offender,” indicating a significant risk to the public, particularly young females. The judge criticized Roche for showing a lack of insight and remorse, noting his refusal to accept the jury’s verdicts. “I agree you are without insight and remorse, refusing to accept the verdicts,” Judge Macdonald stated. “You present a risk of serious harm to young females.”
Despite these concerns, the judge clarified that he lacked the authority to impose a public protection sentence. Roche was sentenced to three years in prison and will be required to register on the sex offenders’ register indefinitely. Additionally, a sexual offences prevention order was imposed for a period of 15 years, which prohibits Roche from working with children and vulnerable adults. The case underscores the ongoing challenges in balancing rehabilitation and public safety in cases involving sexual offences against minors.