LAWRENCE ASBURY OF GRAVESEND SENTENCED FOR SEXUAL ABUSE OF YOUNG GIRL

In November 2016, a tragic case unfolded involving Lawrence Asbury, an 83-year-old resident of Gravesend, who was sentenced to a decade behind bars for heinous sexual offenses committed against a young girl. The court proceedings revealed a disturbing pattern of abuse that spanned several years, highlighting the severity and depravity of Asbury's actions.

During the hearing at Maidstone Crown Court, Asbury appeared frail and visibly in poor health. He was permitted to sit throughout the proceedings, and his legal representative acknowledged his condition by stating to the judge, “He knows he is spending the rest of his life in custody.” The court was informed that Asbury, who had previously been released from prison for indecency with a child, resumed his abusive behavior shortly after his release, targeting the young victim.

The court heard that Asbury’s misconduct extended beyond mere molestation. He took explicit and sordid photographs of the girl, some of which were taken through a hole in a ceiling or wall, indicating a calculated effort to record and preserve these images. When authorities arrested him in 2014, they discovered six Polaroid photographs stored in a black bag, further evidence of his disturbing activities.

Asbury pleaded guilty to multiple charges, including five counts of taking indecent photographs of a child, one count of possessing such images, one of sexual assault, one of indecency with a child, and two counts of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. The prosecution’s case was bolstered by the victim’s delayed disclosure of the abuse, which only came to light in late 2014. The indecent photographs found in Asbury’s possession served as corroborative evidence of the abuse.

The court was told that Asbury had manipulated the girl by showing her pornography and persuading her to pose for increasingly explicit photographs. He justified his actions by claiming that he was sexually assaulting her because his wife no longer wanted to have sex with him. Prosecutor Ian Hope highlighted the coercive nature of Asbury’s conduct, stating that he threatened the girl with further harm and warned her that if she did not comply, he would do the same to another girl and show others the pictures of her. This blackmailing effectively silenced the victim, preventing her from reporting the abuse for fear of further harm or shame.

Historical records revealed that Asbury had a prior conviction in June 2001, when he was sentenced to 30 months in prison after being convicted of indecently assaulting a girl and threatening her with a knife. The recent offenses, according to the prosecution, appeared to have begun almost immediately after his release from prison in January 2002, indicating a pattern of grooming and predatory behavior.

Judge Jeremy Carey sentenced Asbury to ten years in prison, with an additional year on licence due to his classification as “an offender of particular concern.” This meant that Asbury would not be eligible for parole until he had served at least half of his sentence. The judge emphasized the gravity of Asbury’s actions, describing the abuse as “the vilest of ways” carried out with “determination, persistence, and depravity.”

In his remarks, Judge Carey condemned Asbury’s grooming tactics, which involved exposing the young girl to pornography—an act that the judge said was likely beyond her understanding—and then escalating to more explicit abuse. The judge pointed out that Asbury’s threats added a terrifying dimension to his manipulation, especially considering the vulnerability of his young victim.

Despite acknowledging Asbury’s advanced age and health issues, the judge made it clear that these factors would not mitigate the seriousness of his crimes. “You do not deserve sympathy or consideration,” he stated firmly. The court also ordered that Asbury’s name be entered on the sex offenders’ register for life and imposed a sexual harm prevention order to restrict his future conduct.

Judge Carey concluded by condemning Asbury’s conduct, stating that he had committed his crimes “in the vilest of ways” and that his behavior demonstrated he was a serious danger to the public. He recognized Asbury’s frailty but emphasized that the likelihood of his release was minimal, asserting that he would probably spend the rest of his life in custody. The judge also noted that Asbury’s guilty plea came too late and that he had initially denied the allegations, even going so far as to call the victim a liar until the very end.

Following the sentencing, Detective Constable Steve Dingwall, who led the investigation, expressed his views on the case. He stated, “Asbury had only recently been released from prison for sexually abusing another young girl when he went on to re-offend. He therefore clearly poses a risk to children and belongs behind bars where he can cause them no further harm.” He praised the victim’s bravery in coming forward and emphasized that the case sends a strong message to other victims of historic sexual abuse, assuring them that support is available regardless of how much time has passed since the offenses occurred.