A convicted child sex offender found himself back in court after he breached the terms of a court order by deleting online conversations.
Laurence Grieves was made subject to sexual harm prevention order last year after he admitted sending a series of explicit messages to someone who he believed to be a 13-year-old girl.
The 44-year-old’s mobile phone was forensically examined by police and it was discovered that the deleted messages had been sent to an adult but were still in breach of his SHPO order after he wiped them clean.
Last September, the defendant admitted attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. He was handed an 18-month order and told he must complete 25 rehabilitation activity requirement (RAR) days and 150 hours of unpaid work. He is also made subject to a sexual harm prevention order for five years.
Teesside Crown Court heard how the breach took place within weeks of the order being imposed last September and a judge deferred sentence in January after the defendant pleaded guilty.
See more court stories from The Northern Echo by clicking here
- Sex offender, drink and drug drivers, and weapons offenders appear in court
- Trip to McDonald's proved costly for County Durham man banned for drink driving
- Attempted robber branded 'pathetic' for targeting wheelchair user in Darlington
Get more from The Northern Echo with a digital subscription. To get access to our latest offer Click here.
Recorder Alex Menary said: “The Probation Service clearly feel you are someone who could do with further work to address your offending behaviour. I have to consider how best the public can be protected from the risk you pose to them.
“If I was to have sent you to prison in January it would have been for a short period of time and due to the state of prisons at the moment and the availability of rehabilitative work, it is highly unlikely that you would have been able to complete any work to address your offending.”
Grieves, of Shannon Way, Darlington, was made subject of a 12-month community order and told to attend 25 rehabilitation activity requirement days.
He was also made subject of a six-month drug rehabilitation requirement.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel