RON SMITH FROM DIDCOT JAILED FOR SEX ABUSE OF YOUNG BOYS IN OXFORDSHIRE AND BEYOND
| Red Rose Database
Didcot Sexual Abuser
In a case that has sent shockwaves through the local community of Didcot and the wider Oxfordshire area, Ron Smith, a 65-year-old former gym teacher and Olympic gymnastics judge, has been sentenced to three years in prison for serious sexual offenses committed over two decades ago. The conviction was handed down at Oxford Crown Court following a detailed investigation that uncovered disturbing allegations dating back to the 1980s.
Ron Smith, who resided on Wessex Road in Didcot, was found guilty of five counts of indecent assault on a male under the age of 14, as well as one count of indecency with a child under 16. However, he was acquitted of three additional charges of indecent assault on a male under 14. The case's origins trace back to investigations initiated six years prior, when allegations surfaced concerning Smith’s inappropriate conduct towards a young boy during the 1970s.
Prosecutor Rachel Drake explained that initial claims did not suffice to build a case at that time. It was only after the British Gymnastics Association enlisted a private detective to delve into Smith’s past that new evidence emerged. The detective utilized the Friends Reunited website to contact individuals who had been coached by Smith during their childhood, leading to the identification of the first two complainants who came forward with their accounts.
The court heard that the incidents in question occurred between 1982 and 1986, involving three victims aged between 10 and 13 at the time. During the trial, it was revealed that Smith, who had served as a judge at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, would take these boys on weekend trips. These trips often involved camping, staying in youth hostels, or at Smith’s flat in Bath. The court was shown evidence that the boys were given beer and shown pornography, and in some instances, they were made to share his tent or, on one occasion, his bed, where Smith committed sexual assault.
Smith defended himself during the trial, claiming that he might have slept in tents with boys, offered them a sip of beer, and that they might have accidentally seen some of his magazines. He vehemently denied all charges of indecent assault, describing the allegations as a confusing kaleidoscope of events that he could not discern a pattern from. Despite his denials, the jury found him guilty of indecent assault against two 12-year-old boys, leading to his imprisonment.
In a related historical note, Miss Drake informed the court that Smith had previously been convicted of indecent assault against a 12-year-old boy in 1969, for which he was fined £20. Remarkably, he was permitted to continue teaching after writing a letter to the then Education Secretary, a decision that drew criticism from some quarters.
Judge Julian Hall, who presided over the case, read letters from former pupils and young gymnasts expressing their support for Smith’s positive contributions. Nonetheless, the judge emphasized the breach of trust involved, stating, “It is quite clear that you have made a most positive contribution to the lives of many children, particularly in the field in which you are a specialist, but you abused the trust of some of them.” The court’s verdict underscores the serious nature of the offenses and the lasting impact on the victims involved.
Ron Smith, who resided on Wessex Road in Didcot, was found guilty of five counts of indecent assault on a male under the age of 14, as well as one count of indecency with a child under 16. However, he was acquitted of three additional charges of indecent assault on a male under 14. The case's origins trace back to investigations initiated six years prior, when allegations surfaced concerning Smith’s inappropriate conduct towards a young boy during the 1970s.
Prosecutor Rachel Drake explained that initial claims did not suffice to build a case at that time. It was only after the British Gymnastics Association enlisted a private detective to delve into Smith’s past that new evidence emerged. The detective utilized the Friends Reunited website to contact individuals who had been coached by Smith during their childhood, leading to the identification of the first two complainants who came forward with their accounts.
The court heard that the incidents in question occurred between 1982 and 1986, involving three victims aged between 10 and 13 at the time. During the trial, it was revealed that Smith, who had served as a judge at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, would take these boys on weekend trips. These trips often involved camping, staying in youth hostels, or at Smith’s flat in Bath. The court was shown evidence that the boys were given beer and shown pornography, and in some instances, they were made to share his tent or, on one occasion, his bed, where Smith committed sexual assault.
Smith defended himself during the trial, claiming that he might have slept in tents with boys, offered them a sip of beer, and that they might have accidentally seen some of his magazines. He vehemently denied all charges of indecent assault, describing the allegations as a confusing kaleidoscope of events that he could not discern a pattern from. Despite his denials, the jury found him guilty of indecent assault against two 12-year-old boys, leading to his imprisonment.
In a related historical note, Miss Drake informed the court that Smith had previously been convicted of indecent assault against a 12-year-old boy in 1969, for which he was fined £20. Remarkably, he was permitted to continue teaching after writing a letter to the then Education Secretary, a decision that drew criticism from some quarters.
Judge Julian Hall, who presided over the case, read letters from former pupils and young gymnasts expressing their support for Smith’s positive contributions. Nonetheless, the judge emphasized the breach of trust involved, stating, “It is quite clear that you have made a most positive contribution to the lives of many children, particularly in the field in which you are a specialist, but you abused the trust of some of them.” The court’s verdict underscores the serious nature of the offenses and the lasting impact on the victims involved.