PAUL AUCOCK FROM EASTBOURNE SENTENCED AFTER REPEATED SEXUAL OFFENSES ON YOUNG GIRLS

In a disturbing case that has shocked the community of Eastbourne, Paul Aucock, aged 36, was recently brought back before the courts following a series of heinous sexual offenses committed against underage girls. The sequence of events highlights serious concerns about the effectiveness of the current parole and supervision systems for sex offenders.

Back in August 2010, Aucock’s criminal history took a troubling turn. Less than two years after his early release from prison, he was found to have engaged in sexual misconduct with two young girls. His initial incarceration stemmed from a conviction for raping a woman in 2004, for which he served less than 18 months of a 30-month sentence. Despite this relatively short period behind bars, he was released on licence, a move that would later be scrutinized heavily.

Shortly after his release, in 2006, Aucock began abusing a 13-year-old girl. The abuse persisted over a span of two years, during which he continued to exploit her vulnerability. The situation worsened when he later engaged in sexual activity with a 15-year-old girl, an act she insisted was non-consensual. These acts of abuse, committed over several years, drew significant attention from the legal authorities and victim support groups.

On the day of the court hearing at Lewes Crown Court, Judge Anthony Guy, who had previously sentenced Aucock in 2004, delivered a stern judgment. He ordered Aucock to serve a minimum of four years in prison before he could be considered for parole. The judge emphasized the gravity of Aucock’s actions and the risk he posed to the community, especially to young girls. The victims, who attended the hearing visibly distressed, voiced their outrage and disappointment with the sentencing, criticizing what they saw as insufficient punishment and calling for stricter laws to prevent known sex offenders from reoffending.

A sobbing victim of Aucock’s earlier rape expressed her frustration, stating, “I am so angry, that is not nearly enough. He served less than two years for what he did to me and he was able to prey on two innocent girls when he was released, right under the noses of the probation services who were supposed to be watching him. He is a devious, dangerous man who knows how to work the system. The judge’s hands were tied and he gave the maximum sentence possible. But that man could be out in less than four years and he will do it again.”

Details of Aucock’s criminal record reveal that he admitted to five counts of sexual assault on the younger girl between 2006 and 2009, as well as having sex with the 15-year-old in 2009. The court was informed that he was placed on the Sexual Offences Register and was ordered to participate in a relapse prevention program following his early release from his previous rape sentence in 2006. Additionally, he was required to notify police of any change of address as he moved around the country.

However, the court was told that Aucock failed to complete the relapse prevention course, a failure that probation services described as disappointing. During subsequent interactions with authorities, he claimed he did not believe he had done anything wrong. Judge Guy addressed this behavior directly, stating, “You failed to complete the relapse prevention programme. While you were undergoing that group work, you were behaving in this criminal way. I am entirely satisfied that you do pose a significant risk of committing further offences.”

In sentencing, Judge Guy initially considered a 12-year prison term but reduced it to eight years due to Aucock’s guilty plea. He clarified that Aucock would serve at least four years before being eligible for parole. The judge also imposed an indefinite Sex Offenders Prevention Order, which prohibits him from having unsupervised contact with any girl aged 11 to 16 and bans him from working with young people.

A spokeswoman for Victim Support emphasized the importance of proper safeguards, stating, “It’s really important that there are appropriate safeguards in place and that they are followed through when someone is released from prison, including measures to monitor and supervise those released early, to reduce the risk of re-offending.”