DAVID DUNBAR'S ALNESS CRIMES: SEX OFFENDER FLOUTS COMMUNITY SERVICE IN SCANDAL

In March 2014, a disturbing case emerged involving David Dunbar, a man with a troubling history of sexual offenses, who has been caught flouting the community service order imposed upon him in Alness. Dunbar, a former soldier, was convicted of engaging in sexual activities with two underage girls and was sentenced to a community-based punishment as an alternative to imprisonment. However, recent court proceedings have revealed that he has failed to adhere to the conditions of his sentence, raising serious concerns about his rehabilitation and the effectiveness of the justice system.

At Tain Sheriff Court, Sheriff Jamie Gilchrist presided over a review of Dunbar’s community service order. The court was informed that Dunbar had not only neglected to complete his assigned hours but also failed to participate in a specialized course designed for sex offenders. These measures were initially put in place last May, with the intention of providing Dunbar with an opportunity to reform without resorting to jail time. Nonetheless, the court heard that Dunbar’s compliance had been minimal, and his engagement with the program was lacking.

Sheriff Gilchrist acknowledged the criticism that had been directed at his previous sentencing decision. He stated, “Most people who have unlawful sex go to jail. Your client did it twice. He also assaulted a child by pushing him to the ground.” Dunbar, aged 19 and now residing at Kirkside, Alness, was convicted of having sexual relations with a 14-year-old girl at a wooded area in Alness and with another 14-year-old girl at Crawl Park, near the local secondary school. He admitted to having sex with one of the girls between July 1 and August 7, 2010, and with the other on November 24, 2012. Additionally, Dunbar was convicted of pursuing a 13-year-old boy at Kirkside, Alness, on May 21, 2012, and physically assaulting him by punching him in the head, causing injury.

During the hearing, Dunbar’s legal representative, Roger Webb, requested that the court grant his client more time to complete his community service hours. The latest report indicated some slight improvement in Dunbar’s attendance, but it was still far from satisfactory. Webb explained that Dunbar had secured part-time employment, which was impacting his ability to fulfill the 295 hours of community service mandated by the court. This hearing marked the second review of Dunbar’s compliance with his sentence.

Sheriff Gilchrist expressed his disappointment, remarking, “When he appeared last time, you told me that he was taking things on board and he was now attending the Joint Sex Offenders meetings.” However, after reviewing the latest report, the Sheriff was critical of Dunbar’s lack of progress. “He hasn’t been doing what he is supposed to be doing. There are no shades of grey here.”

Addressing Dunbar directly, Sheriff Gilchrist stated sternly, “You clearly still don’t get it. You must do everything that you are required to do. You are not getting your priorities right. I was only persuaded not to send you to prison, and if you are not going to engage, you will be going to jail.” The court scheduled another review for May 27 to assess Dunbar’s ongoing progress.

Reflecting on Dunbar’s original sentencing, his advocate Shahid Latif highlighted that Dunbar was a young man who had experienced tragedy early in life. Latif emphasized that Dunbar had enlisted in the army and served as an able soldier before being discharged on medical grounds. At the time of the offenses, there had been no social work intervention in his life. Sheriff Gilchrist, in sentencing Dunbar for the sex offenses, indicated that prison would be an appropriate punishment. However, he also considered the wider public interest and the potential for rehabilitation.

Rhoda Grant, a local MSP, criticized the leniency of the sentence at the time, stating, “We are talking about statutory rape here, and on the face of it, the sentence does seem lenient. However, I don’t know why the Sheriff has made this decision; there may be a reason why a custodial sentence is not appropriate. When sentences like this are handed out, it’s a signal to society that it is not a horrendous crime when actually it is. It would be in the public interest to know why prison was not an option, but my real fear is that this will be perceived as not being a very serious crime.” The ongoing failure of Dunbar to comply with his community service underscores the challenges faced in managing offenders with such backgrounds and raises questions about the adequacy of current sentencing and rehabilitation strategies in Alness.