PAUL GLEESON FROM GRAYS ESCAPES PRISON AFTER GROOMING AND ABUSE CASE IN ESSEX
| Red Rose Database
Grays Child Sexual Abuser
In a recent case heard at Basildon Crown Court, Paul Gleeson, a 35-year-old resident of Caravel Close in Grays, was convicted of multiple serious sexual offences involving a schoolboy. Despite the gravity of his actions, Gleeson was not sentenced to prison but received a community order instead, sparking concern and debate over the justice process.
Between April 13 and May 2, 2018, Gleeson engaged in a series of predatory behaviors targeting a young boy in Grays, Essex. The court heard that Gleeson, who was over 18 at the time, deliberately communicated with the minor with the intent of sexual gratification. This included sending explicit messages, images, and videos to the boy, knowing that he was under 16 and not reasonably believing he was 16 or older. These communications were part of a calculated effort to exploit the young individual.
Furthermore, Gleeson attempted to manipulate the boy into watching a third person engaging in sexual activity, as well as trying to cause the child to view an image depicting sexual conduct. These actions were carried out with the clear purpose of satisfying Gleeson's own sexual desires, according to the court's findings. The offences took place entirely within Grays, Essex, and involved a disturbing pattern of grooming and exploitation.
The court was informed that Gleeson had already spent nearly eight weeks in remand custody prior to sentencing, reflecting the seriousness of the case. His arrest and subsequent investigation were facilitated by the 'No Excuses' paedophile hunting team, which operates on behalf of 'Groom Resisters Scotland.' The decoy involved in the operation was known as Neo Hunter, who played a key role in exposing Gleeson's predatory behavior.
In sentencing, the judge opted for a 24-month community order rather than imprisonment. Gleeson was also mandated to register as a sex offender for a period of five years and to comply with a five-year sexual harm prevention order. Additionally, he was ordered to participate in a 50-day rehabilitation activity program aimed at addressing his offending behavior. The decision has raised questions about the adequacy of the punishment for such serious offences, especially given the potential risk posed to other children in the community of Grays and beyond.
Between April 13 and May 2, 2018, Gleeson engaged in a series of predatory behaviors targeting a young boy in Grays, Essex. The court heard that Gleeson, who was over 18 at the time, deliberately communicated with the minor with the intent of sexual gratification. This included sending explicit messages, images, and videos to the boy, knowing that he was under 16 and not reasonably believing he was 16 or older. These communications were part of a calculated effort to exploit the young individual.
Furthermore, Gleeson attempted to manipulate the boy into watching a third person engaging in sexual activity, as well as trying to cause the child to view an image depicting sexual conduct. These actions were carried out with the clear purpose of satisfying Gleeson's own sexual desires, according to the court's findings. The offences took place entirely within Grays, Essex, and involved a disturbing pattern of grooming and exploitation.
The court was informed that Gleeson had already spent nearly eight weeks in remand custody prior to sentencing, reflecting the seriousness of the case. His arrest and subsequent investigation were facilitated by the 'No Excuses' paedophile hunting team, which operates on behalf of 'Groom Resisters Scotland.' The decoy involved in the operation was known as Neo Hunter, who played a key role in exposing Gleeson's predatory behavior.
In sentencing, the judge opted for a 24-month community order rather than imprisonment. Gleeson was also mandated to register as a sex offender for a period of five years and to comply with a five-year sexual harm prevention order. Additionally, he was ordered to participate in a 50-day rehabilitation activity program aimed at addressing his offending behavior. The decision has raised questions about the adequacy of the punishment for such serious offences, especially given the potential risk posed to other children in the community of Grays and beyond.