GEORGE NEWMAN SENTENCED IN MERSEA FOR SEXUAL OFFENSES ON YOUNG GIRLS REDUCED BY COURT
| Red Rose Database
Mersea Sexual Abuser
In a recent development from London’s Criminal Appeal Court, Geoffrey Newman, a 61-year-old man formerly residing on Mersea Island, has seen his prison sentence significantly reduced following his conviction for sexual offenses involving three young girls.
Newman was originally sentenced on June 26 after he admitted to committing five counts of indecent assault. Despite the serious nature of his crimes and the fact that he had been assessed as posing a high risk to children he might encounter, the three judges on the appeal panel decided to cut his sentence by a third.
The court heard detailed accounts of Newman’s offenses, which involved sexually assaulting three young girls. The distress experienced by the victims was palpable, with Judge Kenneth Zucker explicitly stating, “All three girls expressed distress at what happened to them.”
Judge Zucker further emphasized the dangerous nature of Newman’s behavior, describing him as someone who presented a “high risk to children for his own self-gratification.” He noted that Newman had openly expressed that his urges were so strong that they led him to disregard the law, believing his actions to be natural and normal.
Despite these serious considerations, the appellate judges—Lord Justice Potter, Mrs Justice Rafferty, and Judge Zucker—concluded that the original six-year sentence was excessive given the circumstances. After reviewing the case, they determined that a four-year term would be more appropriate, effectively reducing Newman’s prison time by two years.
This decision highlights the ongoing debate within the justice system regarding appropriate sentencing for sexual offenses, especially when offenders are assessed as high risk but are given comparatively shorter sentences upon appeal.
Newman was originally sentenced on June 26 after he admitted to committing five counts of indecent assault. Despite the serious nature of his crimes and the fact that he had been assessed as posing a high risk to children he might encounter, the three judges on the appeal panel decided to cut his sentence by a third.
The court heard detailed accounts of Newman’s offenses, which involved sexually assaulting three young girls. The distress experienced by the victims was palpable, with Judge Kenneth Zucker explicitly stating, “All three girls expressed distress at what happened to them.”
Judge Zucker further emphasized the dangerous nature of Newman’s behavior, describing him as someone who presented a “high risk to children for his own self-gratification.” He noted that Newman had openly expressed that his urges were so strong that they led him to disregard the law, believing his actions to be natural and normal.
Despite these serious considerations, the appellate judges—Lord Justice Potter, Mrs Justice Rafferty, and Judge Zucker—concluded that the original six-year sentence was excessive given the circumstances. After reviewing the case, they determined that a four-year term would be more appropriate, effectively reducing Newman’s prison time by two years.
This decision highlights the ongoing debate within the justice system regarding appropriate sentencing for sexual offenses, especially when offenders are assessed as high risk but are given comparatively shorter sentences upon appeal.