FRANCIS HALL RE-JAILLED IN GATESHEAD FOR BREACHING SEXUAL OFFENCES ORDER

Francis Hall, a convicted sex offender from Gateshead, has been sent back to prison after failing to disclose his previous criminal history to a new acquaintance, thereby violating the conditions of his sexual offences prevention order. Hall, aged 63, was originally sentenced in 2011 to serve seven years behind bars following his conviction for indecent assault and gross indecency involving a child. As part of his sentence, a sexual offences prevention order was issued, which explicitly prohibited him from being in the company of children unless the child's parent or guardian was fully aware of the order and had given their consent.

Despite these strict restrictions, Hall breached the order by forming a friendship with a grandmother and subsequently spending time with her grandchildren without informing her of his past convictions or the existence of the order. This breach came to light during a court hearing, where Hall, residing at Warwick Court in Gateshead, pleaded guilty to violating the terms of the sexual offences prevention order between June 2019 and July 2021.

At Newcastle Crown Court, Hall’s defense lawyer, Annalisa Moscardini, acknowledged that her client, who had experienced the loss of his wife in 2017, accepted that he should have disclosed his criminal history and the existence of the order to his new friend. She emphasized that Hall had not attempted to engage with the children directly, stating, “He has not tried to engage with the children.”

The court was informed that Hall had not disclosed his previous convictions or the order to the victims or their guardians, which was a significant breach of the legal restrictions placed upon him. Judge Stephen Earl sentenced Hall to 12 months in prison, underscoring that the terms of the order would have been clearly explained to him at the time of issuance. The judge highlighted that Hall’s breach was straightforward: he did not have the guardian’s consent to be near children under the age of 17, and he failed to inform the guardian of his criminal history.

Judge Earl explained that the breach spanned over a period of more than two years, which justified the immediate custodial sentence. He emphasized that the primary purpose of the order was to protect vulnerable children from potential harm caused by offenders like Hall. The judge also warned that such breaches pose a serious risk to public safety and that offenders must adhere strictly to the conditions set out in their orders to prevent further harm to society’s most vulnerable members.