RONALD SQUIRRELL FLEEING LONGTOWN AND REDCAR PAEDOPHILE FAILS TO REDUCE PRISON SENTENCE

In October 2010, a serious case involving Ronald Squirrell, a convicted paedophile, reached a critical point as he attempted to challenge his prison sentence in the Court of Appeal. Squirrell, aged 71, had previously been sentenced to five years in prison after a court found him guilty of systematically abusing two young girls during the 1990s, while residing in Redcar in the North East of England.

His criminal record includes eight counts of indecent assault, which were formally established in February of that year. The court also imposed an additional six-month sentence specifically for his failure to surrender to bail, highlighting his attempt to evade justice. The case drew significant attention due to the nature of his crimes and his subsequent flight from law enforcement.

Three years prior to his appeal, Squirrell was apprehended in London after his victims finally came forward to report the abuse. Despite his arrest, he chose not to appear in court in May 2007. Instead, he went on the run, living under an assumed identity as Jack Moss at a campsite in Longtown, near Carlisle. His decision to hide allowed him to evade capture for approximately 15 months, during which he remained a fugitive.

His escape and concealment did not go unnoticed. The authorities eventually tracked him down, leading to his arrest in Longtown. The case was brought before the Appeal Court in London, where Mr. Justice Butterfield, along with Lord Justice Hooper and Mr. Justice Kenneth Parker, presided. During the proceedings, it was revealed that Squirrell had engaged in repeated sexual abuse of one of the girls, and had also groped the other girl after luring her to his home. Both victims were in their early teens at the time of the offenses.

Squirrell challenged the validity of his convictions, arguing that they were unsafe. However, Mr. Justice Butterfield dismissed his appeal, stating, "There is no merit in any of the grounds advanced." The court reaffirmed the severity of his crimes and upheld the original sentence, emphasizing the importance of justice for the victims and the need to maintain strict penalties for such heinous offenses.