RICHARD/MCCREA/DAVID HATCH BUSTED IN ARMAGH AND LURGAN FOR SEX OFFENCE BREACHES

In a series of alarming incidents linked to a known sex offender, Richard David McCrea, also known as David Hatch, has once again found himself at the center of legal scrutiny in Northern Ireland. The latest case unfolded in February 2019, when McCrea, who now resides in Dobbins Grove, Armagh, was accused of violating a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) shortly after his release from custody.

According to the High Court proceedings, McCrea, aged 39, allegedly purchased a new mobile phone merely two hours after being released from prison, an act that prosecutors argued was a clear breach of the strict conditions imposed on him. The court was informed that McCrea’s actions were part of a troubling pattern of behaviour, raising concerns about his compliance with the legal restrictions designed to prevent further offences.

Defense lawyers contended that McCrea’s purchase of the phone was solely for contacting family members upon his release, explaining that his previous device was low on battery and needed replacement. Despite this explanation, the court refused to grant him bail, citing his history and the potential risk of further offences. McCrea, who has been classified as a category three sex offender, was previously assessed as posing a significant risk to the public.

The court also revealed that McCrea had a history of attempting to contact minors through social media. Prosecutors detailed that he had previously posed as a 17-year-old on social media platforms in an effort to contact and meet a young girl, an act that contributed to his ongoing legal troubles.

On February 13, McCrea was sentenced to 11 months in prison at Antrim Crown Court for breaching his SOPO in a separate incident. However, due to the time he had already spent in custody on remand, he was released shortly thereafter. One of the conditions of his release was that he was not permitted to acquire a new mobile phone without prior approval from his designated risk manager. Yet, within hours of his release, McCrea reportedly went to Tesco near Antrim Courthouse and purchased an internet-enabled smartphone, an act that prosecutors argued demonstrated a blatant disregard for court orders.

The following day, McCrea contacted his risk manager to confirm his actions, although prosecutors clarified that there was no evidence to suggest he used the phone to commit any further offences. Nevertheless, Crown lawyer Natalie Pinkerton emphasized the seriousness of the breach, stating, “While there hasn’t been any further contact with young people, it was two hours after release from custody that he’s gone to purchase a mobile phone after being expressly told not to.”

Judge Huddleston, presiding over the case, refused to grant bail, citing McCrea’s criminal history and the ongoing risk of him committing further offences. The court’s decision underscores the ongoing concerns about his compliance and the potential danger he poses to the community.

In a related case from 2017, McCrea, then living in Dromore, was involved in another disturbing incident involving a breach of a sex order. He was charged with meeting a female child he had allegedly groomed and was subsequently banned from social media platforms. His history also includes a suspended sentence in March 2009 for breaching a sex order, highlighting a pattern of repeated violations and disregard for legal restrictions.

Back in December 2018, McCrea, residing at Union Street in Lurgan, was found guilty of using mobile phones to contact two teenage girls, aged 15 and 16, in breach of a Risk of Sexual Harm Order. He admitted to possessing two mobile phones and accessing the internet, acts prohibited under the order. For this offence, he received a five-month prison sentence, suspended for three years. The court was informed that McCrea had purchased the phones in October and November of that year and had used them to contact the minors.

Furthermore, a new five-year Sexual Harm Order was issued against him, emphasizing the ongoing restrictions and the serious nature of his offences. The court highlighted that McCrea was aware of the consequences of breaching the order, yet his limited cooperation with probation and previous convictions indicated a troubling pattern of behaviour that continues to threaten public safety.