EDINBURGH OFFENDER BARRY SIMON PETER EASTON CASSIDY SENTENCED FOR BRUTAL CHILD ASSAULTS

At the High Court in Edinburgh, a serious case involving the violent crimes committed by Barry Simon Peter Easton Cassidy was heard, resulting in a significant custodial sentence. Lady Poole, presiding over the court, handed down an extended sentence of six and a half years for the heinous assaults inflicted upon two children by Cassidy.

The sentence comprises four and a half years of imprisonment followed by a two-year period on licence, during which Cassidy will remain under supervision in the community. Lady Poole emphasized the gravity of Cassidy’s actions, stating, “Barry Simon Peter Easton Cassidy, at the High Court in Edinburgh on 26 October 2023, you pled guilty to three aggravated assaults involving two children.”

Details of the offences reveal a disturbing pattern of violence. When one of the children was merely three years old, Cassidy subjected them to a terrifying assault by holding a knife to their neck. Just two days later, in a public park, Cassidy attacked the same child again, this time shouting, dragging, and pushing them. The assault escalated to strangulation when Cassidy tightly wrapped a scarf around the child's neck, causing injuries around their neck and on their cheek.

In addition to these attacks, Cassidy also assaulted a teenager within their shared home. The court heard that Cassidy pinned the teenager down on a sofa, wrapped a cord around their neck, and tightened it, threatening to kill them and warning them not to tell anyone. The victim described the attack as lasting several minutes, during which they believed they were close to death. The assault only ended when the family dog intervened and attacked Cassidy in defense.

Lady Poole condemned these acts as “despicable offences” and a disgrace to inflict such violence on children. She referenced a victim impact statement that detailed the long-lasting psychological and emotional effects of Cassidy’s actions. The court acknowledged that Cassidy may have been under the influence of alcohol or illegal substances at the time, but made it clear that such factors do not excuse the severity of the crimes.

Furthermore, Cassidy’s criminal record is extensive and troubling. The court noted that he has been convicted approximately 20 times, with numerous convictions for violent offences. This case was not Cassidy’s first encounter with violence involving children; a previous assault resulted in severe injuries, leading to a three-year prison sentence and a 12-month supervised release order. His history also includes multiple breaches of bail and court orders, demonstrating a pattern of disregard for legal constraints.

During the proceedings, Cassidy chose to plead guilty on the first day of the trial, which the court acknowledged as a factor in reducing the overall sentence by ten percent. The court also considered a criminal justice social work report, which highlighted Cassidy’s difficult upbringing, some educational achievements, and employment history in the construction industry. The report also noted medical conditions and a history of substance abuse, which were taken into account during sentencing. The court recognized these mitigating factors but emphasized that the severity of the violence committed against children warranted a substantial prison term.

Given the nature of the offences and Cassidy’s prior convictions, Lady Poole expressed her belief that ordinary release conditions would not sufficiently protect the public from further harm. Consequently, she imposed an extended sentence, which includes both a custodial period and an extension period on licence. This structure ensures Cassidy remains under supervision after his release, with conditions set by the Scottish Ministers. Any breach of these conditions could result in his recall to prison to serve the remainder of his sentence.

The total sentence imposed is six and a half years, with four and a half years of imprisonment and a two-year extension on licence. This sentence is a cumulative one, covering all three charges, and is backdated to 12 March 2022. Additionally, Cassidy’s name has been added to the list of individuals deemed unsuitable to work with vulnerable groups.

Finally, the Crown requested a non-harassment order concerning the younger child, given Cassidy’s convictions involving misconduct towards them. Although the court considered such an order appropriate, it ultimately decided against granting it at this time, due to ongoing proceedings before the Children’s hearing. The hearing has already prohibited Cassidy from contacting the child, with review dates scheduled. The court concluded that the Children’s hearing is the appropriate forum to determine contact arrangements, and therefore, a non-harassment order was not issued at this stage. The case remains under review, and further decisions will be made in due course.