PAUL PIERI FROM CURROCK SENTENCED IN CARLISLE FOR HOLIDAY BREACHES AND SEX OFFENDER OFFENSES

In August 2011, a serious legal case unfolded in Carlisle involving Paul Pieri, a registered sex offender residing in the Currock area. Pieri, aged 64 and living on Beaumont Road, found himself back in court after a series of breaches related to his court-imposed restrictions and his failure to adhere to legal obligations as a sex offender.

As a registered sex offender, Paul Pieri was under strict legal requirements that mandated him to inform police authorities whenever he changed his address or traveled outside the country. Despite these obligations, the Carlisle Crown Court heard that in June of that year, Pieri traveled from Manchester to Rhodes for a holiday without notifying the relevant authorities. This act of omission was a clear violation of the court's orders, which aimed to monitor and control his movements due to his previous offenses.

Pieri’s criminal history includes being placed on the sex offenders register last year following a conviction for sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. His restrictions also included a ban from the part of Carlisle where the girl and her family resided, a probation period of three years, and a nighttime curfew. However, it was revealed that Pieri had already breached some of these conditions, including the curfew, by getting up early to go mushroom-picking, which was another violation of his court orders.

Four months after his initial breaches, Pieri appeared again in court, this time before Judge Barbara Forrester. During the hearing, he admitted to breaching the court order by traveling abroad without informing the authorities and also acknowledged another breach related to the curfew. Pieri explained that the short notice booking of his holiday left him no opportunity to notify police or probation services in advance.

Representing him, barrister Elizabeth Muir described her client as someone who demonstrated a “flagrant disregard” for court orders, highlighting his repeated failures to comply. Judge Forrester expressed her disappointment, stating, “You are not willing to comply with any order or the Probation Service. It is clear that you ignored everything that I said and everything probation said. You knew that you were in breach of the orders and you knew that, in your words, you were being a ‘naughty boy’.”

The judge emphasized the seriousness of Pieri’s actions, noting that his disobedience showed a lack of understanding or respect for the court’s authority. She made it clear that no further leniency would be granted, given his history of breaches. As a result, Judge Forrester sentenced Pieri to 18 weeks in prison for the original offenses, with the sentences to run concurrently. An additional six-week sentence was imposed for his failure to notify authorities of his travel plans, to be served consecutively. Pieri had already served 22 days on remand at the time of sentencing.

Following the court’s decision, all previous community orders were revoked. The court also mandated that upon his release, Pieri must continue to notify authorities of his whereabouts, ensuring ongoing monitoring of his movements. This case underscores the importance of compliance with court orders, especially for individuals with a history of sexual offenses, and highlights the legal consequences of breaches that undermine public safety and judicial authority.