ROY APPLETON SENTENCED IN CHELMSFORD FOR GROOMING VULNERABLE TEENAGER
| Red Rose Database
Writtle Child Sexual Abuser
In June 2011, Roy Appleton, a 71-year-old man from Writtle, was sentenced for grooming a 14-year-old girl. A high-risk paedophile, Appleton had befriended a vulnerable family who had medical and learning difficulties. He showered the girl with gifts, including a television and karaoke machine, and maintained the pretense of being her grandfather when she fell ill and visited her doctor.
However, staff at the doctor’s surgery became suspicious because they knew the real grandfather, and they alerted police. Despite a court order prohibiting any contact with children under 16, Appleton failed to disclose his relationship with the family to authorities. The court was told he was considered by police to be at "a very high risk of offending against children" due to his criminal history, which includes convictions from the 1960s for indecent assault and a previous jail sentence for abducting a teenage girl while impersonating a taxi driver.
Appleton’s address was Shakeston Close, Writtle. He was also banned from being alone with children under 16 under his sex offences prevention order, and was supposed to inform police if he came into contact with any minors, but he did not reveal his connection to the family.
The matter came to light when the teenager became ill and visited her doctor. During the visit, the surgery received a call from someone claiming to be her grandfather. The voice was not that of the real grandfather, which prompted staff to become suspicious.
Subsequently, Appleton was arrested but largely refused to answer police questions. Although no evidence was found of sexual assault, he admitted to breaching the sex offence order. He was charged with breaking the terms of his order and received a 22-month prison sentence.
Judge Laura Harris remarked that Appleton had employed "devious behaviour" to befriend the family, and she described his actions—particularly the giving of gifts to the girl—as "a classic case of grooming." The court also extended restrictions, preventing him from befriending any family with children under 16 without prior police approval.
Prosecutor Alan Compton highlighted that the family was vulnerable and had medical issues, and he pointed out Appleton’s role as a grandfather figure while he was under police surveillance. Despite the involved monitoring, Appleton did not disclose his contact with the family, which led to the breach being uncovered.
In mitigation, Natasha Nair stated that Appleton regretted his actions and emphasized that there was no sexual abuse involved in this case.
However, staff at the doctor’s surgery became suspicious because they knew the real grandfather, and they alerted police. Despite a court order prohibiting any contact with children under 16, Appleton failed to disclose his relationship with the family to authorities. The court was told he was considered by police to be at "a very high risk of offending against children" due to his criminal history, which includes convictions from the 1960s for indecent assault and a previous jail sentence for abducting a teenage girl while impersonating a taxi driver.
Appleton’s address was Shakeston Close, Writtle. He was also banned from being alone with children under 16 under his sex offences prevention order, and was supposed to inform police if he came into contact with any minors, but he did not reveal his connection to the family.
The matter came to light when the teenager became ill and visited her doctor. During the visit, the surgery received a call from someone claiming to be her grandfather. The voice was not that of the real grandfather, which prompted staff to become suspicious.
Subsequently, Appleton was arrested but largely refused to answer police questions. Although no evidence was found of sexual assault, he admitted to breaching the sex offence order. He was charged with breaking the terms of his order and received a 22-month prison sentence.
Judge Laura Harris remarked that Appleton had employed "devious behaviour" to befriend the family, and she described his actions—particularly the giving of gifts to the girl—as "a classic case of grooming." The court also extended restrictions, preventing him from befriending any family with children under 16 without prior police approval.
Prosecutor Alan Compton highlighted that the family was vulnerable and had medical issues, and he pointed out Appleton’s role as a grandfather figure while he was under police surveillance. Despite the involved monitoring, Appleton did not disclose his contact with the family, which led to the breach being uncovered.
In mitigation, Natasha Nair stated that Appleton regretted his actions and emphasized that there was no sexual abuse involved in this case.