Convicted sex offender cleared to run childcare centre

    7
    0
    SHARE

    A man convicted of sex offences, who has been the subject of multiple protection and apprehended violence orders, has been cleared to run a childcare business.

    His appeal came after his sexual offending, which primarily took place in 1982, resulted in him being denied a working with children check.

    Court documents  from the Supreme Court of NSW show at the age of 15, the man grabbed the crotch of a woman through her pants and groped another woman over her clothing and exposed himself to her.

    A man convicted of sexual offences has been cleared to run a childcare centre after appealing his denied working with children check

    A man convicted of sexual offences has been cleared to run a childcare centre after appealing his denied working with children check

    In the same year, he pulled up the t-shirt of another woman and grabbed her breasts before inviting her to give him oral sex, made lewd comments to a schoolgirl and ‘invited her to sit on his penis’ and assaulted another woman by grabbing her breast after she refused to kiss him.

    On Wednesday, Justice Richard Button found that though the man, whose identity had been suppressed had acted: ‘boorishly, unattractively, and anti-socially’ over the years, he did not pose a danger to children.

    ‘Although the evidence suggests that [the individual] may engage in further misconduct in the future, there is no evidence that his past misconduct since the 1982 events has posed any real or appreciable risk to children,’ he noted in his judgement. 

    Since his early offending, the man went on to become a successful businessman, particularly with regard to childcare centres. 

    Documents show while he ‘has neither worked directly with children in the past, nor intends to work directly with them in the future, his lack of a clearance has presented serious logistical problems in the running of his business’.

    The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, went on a sexual crime spree in 1982 where he groped multiple women, exposed himself and made lewd comments

    The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, went on a sexual crime spree in 1982 where he groped multiple women, exposed himself and made lewd comments

    The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, went on a sexual crime spree in 1982 where he groped multiple women, exposed himself and made lewd comments

    Ten years after his sexual offending spree, the man entered a woman’s bedroom, at her request, but then ‘pulled down the top of her nightdress and after a struggle grabbed her breast’.

    In 2002, he groped two policewomen, before then grabbing the bottom of an elderly lady and making lewd remarks to her – though no charges were laid in regards to the incidents. 

    The man has also been convicted of cocaine possession and ordered to pay damages after urinating on the floor of a hotel while intoxicated. 

    In 2004, he opened a childcare centre without a licence, resulting in a conviction and a fine. The magistrate at the time made comments regarding his ‘obnoxious and bullish’ attitude.

    Justice Richard Button of the NSW Supreme Court found that despite his convictions, the man did not pose a risk to children

    Justice Richard Button of the NSW Supreme Court found that despite his convictions, the man did not pose a risk to children

    Justice Richard Button of the NSW Supreme Court found that despite his convictions, the man did not pose a risk to children

    He has been the subject of multiple AVOs, with two former partners reporting domestic violence acts committed against them.

    Just two years ago, he was reported to the Department of Community Services after his 15-year-old son wrote a story stating ‘he is not doing well at his father’s as he swears at them and hits them’.

    Justice Button acknowledged the man’s 1982 crimes, but noted there has not since been any evidence he has committed any offence against a child, ‘whether sexual or of any other kind’.

    ‘In light of the fact that the fundamental inquiry being undertaken by the Tribunal was whether the individual presented a risk to children, the reasons make clear that his criminal and vulgar behaviour did not, in the opinion of the Tribunal, demonstrate such a risk,’ he said. 

      

    قالب وردپرس