A Wisbech mum has discovered that the man she lived with for a year – and is expecting their baby- had not declared his previous conviction for sexual offences against a child.
Throughout that time Craig Durrant failed to tell her and had not told police he was living with her and therefore was in breach of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) imposed in 2016.
Durrant, 27, was also placed on the Sexual Offenders Register four years ago following his conviction: again, information he withheld from the woman.
Only when police checked on Durrant in July, did the extent of his deception become known.
A month later he was arrested in Wisbech town centre and on Wednesday (October 21) was jailed for one year and three months.
Detective Constable Emily Heriot, from the north Public Protection Unit, said: “Durrant was aware of the conditions he must adhere to which have been in place for the last four years.
“He had every opportunity to disclose to police and probation the changes but failed to do so. With support, all parties involved in this case can start to move on with their lives.
She added: “These conditions and measures are put in place to protect our communities and children from sexual offenders, which is why our team works so hard to make sure any breaches are highlighted and put before the courts.
Conditions of being on the Sex Offenders Register meant Durrant was to tell police within three days if he stays at a house for at least 12 hours where a child is present.
He was also required to notify them of any changes in address including anywhere he stays for more than seven days, changes in contact details or access to bank accounts/cards.
On July 19, a police officer from the Public Protection Unit – who monitors registered sex offenders – paid Durrant an unannounced visit.
He was not in but a housemate gave the officer his phone number to reach him on, one which was not on the officer’s records for Durrant.
It was later discovered Durrant had been using the smart phone to use WhatsApp.
Police then found the address where he had been staying secretly and had also using an email address and bank card which were not registered with police.
The SHPO contained strict conditions which Durrant broke.
He is not allowed unsupervised contact with a female child under 16 unless he has the consent of a child’s parent or guardian who has knowledge of his convictions and with approval of social services
He is also not meant to live in the same household as a female child under 16 without approval of social services
Another condition forbids him to contact any female child under 16, by any means including telephone, text, social media, or any other media sharing website
And the order bans him using a smart phone, computer, or electronic device capable of accessing the internet unless it has the capacity to retain and display the history.
Durrant was required to keep police informed of his location before using it and to make it available on request for inspection by police.
Durrant had been living with a woman her two children for almost a year and the couple were expecting a baby. She was unaware of his previous convictions.
Durrant, of King Street in Wisbech, admitted three counts of breaching conditions of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) and three counts of failing to comply with the notification requirements of being on the Sex Offenders Register.
DC Heriot said: “I strongly urge anyone in a new relationship to use the Sarah’s Law disclosure scheme which allows you to ask us whether someone with access to a child has a record of child sex offences.”
Information about Sarah’s Law and the child sex offender disclosure scheme can be found on the force website here https://bit.ly/37B5E64.
he campaign for Sarah’s Law was spearheaded by the News of the World newspaper, and began in July 2000 in response to the murder of Sarah Payne. Sarah Payne’s parents backed up the campaign as they were sure that a child sex offender had been responsible for their daughter’s death.
Policing Fenland has been inundated with comments on facebook page about the case. Many have asked how Durrant was left unsupervised and was able to live at an alternate address.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here