CARE HOME WORKER FOUND GUILTY OF SEXUALLY ASSAULTING CHILDREN 50 YEARS AGO
A former children’s home worker from West Lothian has been sentenced to 10 years in prison after being convicted of sexually assaulting two young residents decades ago.Peter Murray, aged 70, took advantage of his position at the Colonsay Children’s Home located on Colonsay Street in Perth, to target two victims—a girl he first assaulted when she was 14, beginning in January 1976, and a boy aged 14 whom he abused starting in August 1980.
During the trial at the High Court in Edinburgh, a jury found Murray guilty of two counts of indecent assault involving penetrative acts.
A judge, Lady Carmichael, emphasized that the victims’ vulnerability was due to their age and their residence in a care home, and noted Murray’s access to them through his employment.
Murray, who denied the accusations at trial but was convicted, initially targeted the girl with sexual remarks, molestation, and unwanted encounters when she was undressed, even offering her money in exchange for favours.
The abuse against the boy involved coercing him into sexual acts, watching him naked, and assaulting him over the course of a year.
The female victim, who spoke with detectives in 2022, described the abuse as “terrible” and “disgusting,” recalling Murray walking in on her in the shower and offering money for sex.
Defence lawyer Deirdre Flanigan argued that Murray maintained his innocence but acknowledged he faced a prison sentence.
Murray, who now suffers from health issues, was sentenced to be registered as a sex offender indefinitely and viewed the proceedings via a link to prison.
The conviction comes after nearly 50 years since the start of the abuse, which was uncovered through testimonies and forensic investigation.
The court also heard that Murray, living in Livingston, West Lothian, attacked his victims while they were in his care at the home.
The case highlighted issues surrounding the history of abuse within Colonsay Children’s Home, which has previously been scrutinized in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry.
The court’s evidence included a video interview where one victim recounted his trauma, including Murray’s entry into his bedroom and shower room during undress and sleep, as well as the offer of money for sex.
The victim described the experiences as “terrible” and “disgusting,” feeling very sick afterward.
Murray’s defence questioned the credibility of the victims’ claims, but evidence from police investigations in England and Scotland firmly established the abuse.
Murray, who has a prior conviction from 1993, is scheduled for sentencing at Edinburgh’s High Court in October 2025.
SENTENCING OUTCOME - 9/10/2025 At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lady Carmichael sentenced Peter Murray to 10 years' imprisonment after the offender was convicted of indecent assault.
On sentencing, Lady Carmichael said: "The jury found you guilty of two offences of indecent assault.
Both complainers described various instances of sexual behaviour by you which progressed to penetrative assaults.
The assault on the complainer in charge 1 involved penetration of her vagina with your fingers.
The assault on the complainer in charge 2 involved penetration of his anus with your penis.
The offences are serious themselves because of that conduct.
The complainers were vulnerable by reason of their age and their residence in a children's home.
You had access to them because of your employment there.
Your conduct involved a significant breach of trust on your part.
It was conduct obviously liable to harm the victims and has had that result.
If I were sentencing on charge 1 alone I would impose sentence of 6 years and if sentencing on charge 2 alone, a sentence of 8 years.
I need to impose a sentence that is proportionate looking at the indictment as a whole.
I take into account also your age and state of health.
The only other offending of which you have been convicted is of an analogous nature.
The conviction post-dates the conduct on this indictment.
The conduct that resulted in that conviction pre-dates the conduct on this indictment.
There is no evidence that you have offended since your other conviction, some 30 years ago.
With that chronology in mind, and again bearing in mind your age and state of health, I am not persuaded that it is necessary to impose an extended sentence because the period you would otherwise serve on licence would be insufficient for the protection of the public.
I consider that the sentencing purposes of punishment, deterrence and public protection will be served in this case by sentencing you in cumulo to 10 years’ imprisonment, backdated to 8 September 2025 which is when you were first remanded in connection with this matter."
