PAUL DEAN'S SHOCKING CRIMES IN SOUTHEND: CHARITY FOUNDER TRIED TO KIDNAP CHILD
| Red Rose Database
Southend Child Sexual Abuser
In August 1999, a disturbing case unfolded in Southend involving Paul Dean, a man once celebrated for his charitable work but later revealed to have a troubling past. Dean, who was instrumental in founding the Dream Team charity, was convicted of attempting to abduct a four-year-old boy from a housing estate in Plaistow, east London, and sentenced to five years in prison.
The conviction followed a lengthy investigation and trial at the Old Bailey, where it was disclosed that Dean had a history of harassing young boys. In 1986, Dean, then 30 years old and residing on Woodgrange Drive in Southend, had admitted to approximately 70 charges related to making obscene telephone calls and sending obscene letters to minors. These offenses occurred a decade prior to the attempted abduction, and Dean had received a six-month probation sentence at that time. Additionally, he had requested that 68 similar offenses be considered during his sentencing.
Prosecutor Miss Angela Morris highlighted the disturbing nature of Dean’s previous conduct, stating, “The material concerned what he would like to do to the two boys,” emphasizing that the content was of a homosexual nature. Despite his criminal record, Dean went on to establish the Dream Team charity in Southend, based at Priory Works, Priory Place. The organization was well-known locally for organizing special outings for children, including trips to Disney World, and for introducing them to television personalities. The charity quickly gained prominence, raising approximately £250,000 in its first year and providing memorable experiences for sick and disabled children.
However, the court heard that Dean’s criminal past cast a shadow over his charitable endeavors. The judge, Mr. Recorder Christopher Moss, expressed his reservations about what Dean might have intended to do with the child he attempted to abduct. He suggested that Dean had planned the act while his wife, Maree Dean, who served as the charity’s chairman, was away in Nottingham. The incident on October 18 of the previous year took place on a housing estate in Plaistow, east London, where Dean approached a four-year-old boy. The child’s mother, watching from her balcony, became alarmed when Dean disappeared with her son. She called out his name and saw a man running away. When she found her son, he was visibly shaken and told her, “He nearly took me away.”
During the trial, it was revealed that Dean had physically held the boy for two or three minutes before the mother intervened. A passerby managed to record Dean’s car registration number, which became crucial evidence. Dean denied the charges, claiming he was at Lakeside shopping center at the time of the incident and had not been on the estate.
Legal experts and community members expressed concern over the implications of Dean’s actions. Penelope Barret, a representative of the charity sector, remarked, “His conviction means a number of people will lose an enormous amount of benefit. He acted as a fundraiser and had little contact with the recipients.” The judge reinforced the importance of protecting children, stating, “Children have to be protected from people like you,” while affirming that the charity itself was properly managed and had no connection to Dean’s criminal activities.
Media coverage of Dean’s case highlighted his previous involvement in charity work, with photographs showing him engaging in fundraising activities for the Dream Team. Many local residents and beneficiaries expressed shock and disbelief, recalling Dean as a kind and caring individual. One mother, whose son’s dream was fulfilled by the charity shortly before his death, described Dean as “a very nice man” who had gone out of his way to make her son’s experience memorable.
Conversely, some individuals who had interacted with Dean recently noted inconsistencies. A woman from Laindon, who wished to remain anonymous, stated she had seen Dean at a Christmas party organized by the Dream Team just two months after he was charged, contradicting the charity’s claim that he had been absent for 18 months. His wife, Maree, was evasive about his whereabouts, claiming he was in Australia or elsewhere.
The Charity Commission responded by establishing a working group to examine how individuals with criminal backgrounds could establish charities. They acknowledged the risks involved, especially given Dean’s prior conviction, and emphasized their commitment to safeguarding children and maintaining the integrity of charitable organizations. The commission stated, “It is clearly undesirable for a paedophile to be involved inappropriately in the running of a children’s charity, and the Charity Commission would wish to take any action it can to protect any charity that finds itself in this situation.”
Former associates of Dean and the Dream Team criticized the oversight that allowed someone with his criminal history to set up a charity. An anonymous source questioned how Dean’s record could have been overlooked, describing him as “very, very friendly towards children” and noting his apparent ego and desire for publicity. They also revealed that Dean often belittled his wife, Maree, who was the charity’s chairman, and that he had a tendency to manipulate those around him.
Overall, the case has cast a long shadow over the reputation of the Dream Team charity and raised serious questions about the vetting processes for individuals involved in organizations dedicated to children’s welfare. The community and authorities alike are now calling for stricter measures to prevent similar incidents in the future, emphasizing the need for thorough background checks and vigilant oversight to protect vulnerable children from potential harm.
The conviction followed a lengthy investigation and trial at the Old Bailey, where it was disclosed that Dean had a history of harassing young boys. In 1986, Dean, then 30 years old and residing on Woodgrange Drive in Southend, had admitted to approximately 70 charges related to making obscene telephone calls and sending obscene letters to minors. These offenses occurred a decade prior to the attempted abduction, and Dean had received a six-month probation sentence at that time. Additionally, he had requested that 68 similar offenses be considered during his sentencing.
Prosecutor Miss Angela Morris highlighted the disturbing nature of Dean’s previous conduct, stating, “The material concerned what he would like to do to the two boys,” emphasizing that the content was of a homosexual nature. Despite his criminal record, Dean went on to establish the Dream Team charity in Southend, based at Priory Works, Priory Place. The organization was well-known locally for organizing special outings for children, including trips to Disney World, and for introducing them to television personalities. The charity quickly gained prominence, raising approximately £250,000 in its first year and providing memorable experiences for sick and disabled children.
However, the court heard that Dean’s criminal past cast a shadow over his charitable endeavors. The judge, Mr. Recorder Christopher Moss, expressed his reservations about what Dean might have intended to do with the child he attempted to abduct. He suggested that Dean had planned the act while his wife, Maree Dean, who served as the charity’s chairman, was away in Nottingham. The incident on October 18 of the previous year took place on a housing estate in Plaistow, east London, where Dean approached a four-year-old boy. The child’s mother, watching from her balcony, became alarmed when Dean disappeared with her son. She called out his name and saw a man running away. When she found her son, he was visibly shaken and told her, “He nearly took me away.”
During the trial, it was revealed that Dean had physically held the boy for two or three minutes before the mother intervened. A passerby managed to record Dean’s car registration number, which became crucial evidence. Dean denied the charges, claiming he was at Lakeside shopping center at the time of the incident and had not been on the estate.
Legal experts and community members expressed concern over the implications of Dean’s actions. Penelope Barret, a representative of the charity sector, remarked, “His conviction means a number of people will lose an enormous amount of benefit. He acted as a fundraiser and had little contact with the recipients.” The judge reinforced the importance of protecting children, stating, “Children have to be protected from people like you,” while affirming that the charity itself was properly managed and had no connection to Dean’s criminal activities.
Media coverage of Dean’s case highlighted his previous involvement in charity work, with photographs showing him engaging in fundraising activities for the Dream Team. Many local residents and beneficiaries expressed shock and disbelief, recalling Dean as a kind and caring individual. One mother, whose son’s dream was fulfilled by the charity shortly before his death, described Dean as “a very nice man” who had gone out of his way to make her son’s experience memorable.
Conversely, some individuals who had interacted with Dean recently noted inconsistencies. A woman from Laindon, who wished to remain anonymous, stated she had seen Dean at a Christmas party organized by the Dream Team just two months after he was charged, contradicting the charity’s claim that he had been absent for 18 months. His wife, Maree, was evasive about his whereabouts, claiming he was in Australia or elsewhere.
The Charity Commission responded by establishing a working group to examine how individuals with criminal backgrounds could establish charities. They acknowledged the risks involved, especially given Dean’s prior conviction, and emphasized their commitment to safeguarding children and maintaining the integrity of charitable organizations. The commission stated, “It is clearly undesirable for a paedophile to be involved inappropriately in the running of a children’s charity, and the Charity Commission would wish to take any action it can to protect any charity that finds itself in this situation.”
Former associates of Dean and the Dream Team criticized the oversight that allowed someone with his criminal history to set up a charity. An anonymous source questioned how Dean’s record could have been overlooked, describing him as “very, very friendly towards children” and noting his apparent ego and desire for publicity. They also revealed that Dean often belittled his wife, Maree, who was the charity’s chairman, and that he had a tendency to manipulate those around him.
Overall, the case has cast a long shadow over the reputation of the Dream Team charity and raised serious questions about the vetting processes for individuals involved in organizations dedicated to children’s welfare. The community and authorities alike are now calling for stricter measures to prevent similar incidents in the future, emphasizing the need for thorough background checks and vigilant oversight to protect vulnerable children from potential harm.