SIMON RAGLAN SENTENCED IN CAMBERLEY SEX ATTACK CASE BACKED BY TOP JUDGES

In August 2015, a disturbing case involving Simon Raglan, a resident of Camberley, drew significant attention from the judiciary due to the serious nature of his crimes. Raglan, aged 47, was convicted of sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl after allegedly providing her with homemade alcohol to impair her judgment. The incident took place in Camberley, where Raglan resided on Parkhill Road, Blackwater.

Following his conviction, Raglan was sentenced to a two-year prison term at Reading Crown Court in October of the previous year. In addition to his incarceration, he was subjected to a sexual offences prevention order (SOPO), which explicitly prohibited him from engaging in any unregulated contact with minors. Despite the conviction, Raglan was acquitted of two other counts of sexual assault, which had been part of the original charges.

The case was subsequently brought before London's Appeal Court, where Raglan challenged both his conviction and his sentence. His legal representative, QC Howard Godfrey, argued that the jury should have been discharged before reaching a verdict, citing the belief that the jury had reached a complete deadlock after extensive deliberation. The jury foreperson had indicated to the trial judge that they were unlikely to reach a consensus after hours of discussion, prompting Mrs Justice Lang to consider discharging them.

However, the judge decided against dismissing the jury, instead allowing them to return home overnight and resume deliberations the following day. When they reconvened, the jury convicted Raglan of one count of sexual assault by a majority decision. Mrs Justice Lang, along with Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Lewis, reviewed the circumstances and found no evidence suggesting the jury felt undue pressure during their deliberations. She stated, "We consider it was reasonable to allow them further time, providing the judge made clear that they were not being placed under any such pressure. We conclude that the jury was not placed under any improper pressure and therefore there are no arguable grounds for appealing this conviction."

In his appeal, QC Godfrey also challenged the severity of Raglan’s sentence and the imposition of the SOPO. He emphasized Raglan’s previous good character, his role as a family man and father, and argued that the sentence should have been suspended rather than served in prison. The barrister described Raglan as "not a deviant or a paedophile" and characterized the assault as a "one-off and out of character" incident. He further claimed that the victim was "not unaccustomed to drinking" and suggested that her age and experience should be taken into account.

Nevertheless, Mrs Justice Lang upheld the original sentence, asserting that it was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive. She highlighted that the victim had suffered significant adverse effects from the attack, which was facilitated by Raglan giving her excessive amounts of alcohol. The court also confirmed the validity of the SOPO, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the need to prevent future harm. The case underscores the ongoing concerns about safeguarding minors and the judicial system’s approach to handling sexual offences involving alcohol and vulnerable victims in Camberley and the surrounding areas.