PHILLIP BARHAM SENTENCED IN BILLINGHURST: INDEFINITE JAIL TERM FOR SEX OFFENSES
In October 2015, the case of Phillip John Barham, a 56-year-old man from Billinghurst, took a significant turn as he faced the Court of Appeal regarding his lengthy imprisonment.Barham, who was originally sentenced in 2008, has been detained for over eight years following a conviction related to an incident involving a teenage girl.
His case highlights ongoing concerns about the management and sentencing of sex offenders considered to be a danger to the public.
Barham was convicted of attempting to solicit a sexual act from a minor in exchange for cigarettes and vodka.
The incident occurred in Billinghurst in 2007, when he pulled up in his car near a group of young people sitting on a wall.
A girl under the age of 16 was present along with her friends.
Barham made a sexual comment to the girl and offered to buy her alcohol and cigarettes if she performed a sexual act.
When he returned after purchasing the items, the girl took the goods and ran away.
Her friends later saw him sitting in his car and reported the incident, leading to his arrest.
At Lewes Crown Court, Barham was deemed a ‘dangerous’ offender and was sentenced to an indefinite imprisonment for public protection (IPP).
The court ordered him to serve a minimum of 18 months before any consideration of release.
His history of previous convictions, including five for gross indecency—where he approached individuals, some of whom were children, and solicited sex acts—played a significant role in the severity of his sentence.
Despite his imprisonment, Barham’s legal team filed an appeal on October 20, arguing that the open-ended IPP sentence was disproportionate and unjustified.
They contended that the offences he committed were of low seriousness and that there was no evidence of ‘serious’ harm.
However, the appeal was dismissed by three of the country’s leading judges.
Lord Justice Elias emphasized that there was ample evidence indicating Barham posed a ‘significant risk’ to children, justifying the continued detention.
The Court of Appeal acknowledged the concern that Barham had been incarcerated for over eight years without release, but noted that he had not admitted to having a propensity to offend against young children.
The court upheld the indefinite sentence, which was specifically for one count of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
This decision underscores the ongoing legal and societal debate about the appropriate length and conditions of detention for offenders deemed to be a danger to minors, especially in cases where rehabilitation remains uncertain.
