MARK TURTON/CHRISTOPHER LEWIS BREACHES COURT ORDER IN ILLLOGAN HIGHWAY

In October 2008, a serious breach of a court-mandated order resulted in the return of a 43-year-old man to custody at Truro Crown Court. The individual, known by the names Mark Turton and Christopher Lewis, had previously served a seven-year prison sentence for two separate offenses involving the sexual assault of an underage girl. Despite his release, he was found to have violated the terms of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO), leading to his re-arrest and subsequent sentencing.

Turton, whose address was listed as Illogan Highway, admitted to four separate breaches of the SOPO, as well as a failure to notify the police of a change in his residential address. The breaches came to light when police discovered that Turton was in a relationship with a woman who was eight months pregnant with his child. This relationship was significant because the SOPO explicitly restricted him from being in certain situations, especially those involving minors or vulnerable individuals.

Prosecutor Ron Ede explained that the order was put in place after authorities learned of Turton’s relationship with this woman, which was considered a breach of the restrictions. The police found that Turton had been staying at her home two or three times a week, despite the restrictions that prohibited him from being alone with female children or residing in a household with minors under 16, unless certain conditions were met. The fact that he was staying at her residence, where children under 16 were present, was a direct violation of the court’s orders.

During the hearing, Fred Howell, representing Turton, acknowledged that the only mitigating factor was the absence of any new allegations of misconduct. He also noted that Turton had pleaded guilty to the breaches. The court sentenced Turton to 18 months in prison, emphasizing the importance of the orders designed to protect the public from individuals with his criminal history.

Judge Christopher Elwen highlighted the gravity of the breaches, stating, “It was felt you should not be alone with female children, and what concerned the authorities was your relationship with a vulnerable woman with young children. You were precluded from staying at a residence where there was a child under 16, apart from any child born to you and only if your offending history was known.”

The judge further explained that investigations confirmed Turton was staying at the woman’s home, which was explicitly forbidden under the terms of the order. Additionally, Turton failed to inform the authorities of his change of address, as required by law. The court also noted that the probation service considered him to be at high or very high risk of re-offending, and that he had attempted to disguise his whereabouts to circumvent the restrictions placed upon him.

It was also noted that Turton had spent 80 days in custody on remand, which would be counted towards his overall sentence. The case underscores the ongoing challenges faced by law enforcement and judicial authorities in monitoring and enforcing restrictions on individuals with a history of sexual offenses, especially those involving minors and vulnerable persons.