ALEXANDER LUCAS SENTENCED IN BRIDPORT FOR SEXUAL OFFENSES INVOLVING 13-YEAR-OLDS

In August 2007, a young man from Bridport named Alexander Lucas was handed a two-year sentence at a Young Offender Institution following serious allegations of sexual misconduct involving two girls, both aged 13. The case was heard at Dorchester Crown Court, where the court was informed that Lucas, aged 18 at the time, had engaged in sexual activity with the two minors, one of whom subsequently became pregnant.

The court heard that Lucas's involvement with the first girl took place at a mutual friend's residence, where he had spent the night. The girl confided in her school friends and later disclosed the incident to her teacher. Following her revelations, Lucas was arrested and initially denied any sexual contact, claiming that the girl had merely hugged him. However, subsequent forensic medical examinations provided evidence that contradicted his account, revealing that sexual intercourse had indeed occurred.

Further complicating the case was the second girl, with whom Lucas admitted to having sex while both were intoxicated in a park in Bridport. It was only after scientific tests confirmed that Lucas was the biological father of her unborn child that he admitted to the sexual encounter. During police interviews, Lucas stated that he believed the girl was 14, reasoning that he thought that was the legal age for sexual activity. He also acknowledged that he could not recall the details of the second incident due to alcohol consumption but was aware that she was only 13.

Lucas's legal history included previous admissions of guilt to two counts of sexual activity with a minor, which resulted in his registration on the sex offenders' register. The court also imposed a ban preventing him from working with children under 18 years of age. The judge, Christopher Harvey Clark, emphasized that Lucas must serve half of his sentence before being eligible for release on licence.

During the proceedings, Lucas's defense attorney, Frank Abbott, highlighted the defendant's vulnerabilities, including a diagnosis of ADHD. Abbott explained that Lucas had struggled to manage his medication earlier in the year when the offenses occurred but was now under treatment and showing signs of improvement. He described Lucas as highly immature, with educational, intellectual, and clinical disadvantages, emphasizing his need for support to lead a normal life. Abbott also expressed concern that Lucas would be vulnerable and suffer if placed in custody.

The judge acknowledged that, according to sentencing guidelines, a custodial sentence of four years might have been appropriate. However, considering Lucas's age, the fact that the girls had consented, his medical condition, and the impact of the prosecution, he decided on a lesser sentence. The judge stated, "I don’t suggest that you being sent to a YOI is necessarily of benefit to you but there must be an element of deterrence to deter other young men who think sex with young girls is acceptable." The court's decision reflects a balance between punishment, deterrence, and recognition of Lucas's vulnerabilities.