Known sex offender was allowed to live with a child (From The Northern Echo)

Known sex offender was allowed to live with a child

8:00am Saturday 20th March 2010 in

• Skip social links
• Print
• Email
• Comments(11)

A NORTH-EAST council worker was suspended yesterday after the publication of a damning report into how a known sex offender was allowed to live with a child he went on to abuse.

A number of agencies across Teesside and Durham knew about the man’s criminal history, but failed to tell the child’s mother.

A Serious Case Review (SCR) carried out by Stockton Local Safeguarding Children Board revealed a catalogue of failures that led to inadequate protection for the youngster.

Last night, Stockton Borough Council said it had suspended a member of staff after it admitted sending an unqualified worker to assess the family.

At the time of the abuse, which took place in 2008, the man was taking part in the Northumbria Sex Offender treatment programme.

He was under the supervision of Cleveland Police and the National Probation Service Teesside and Durham.

He had previously pleaded guilty to three offences of sending inappropriate text messages to children as young as 13 in County Durham – for which he was given a 12- month suspended prison sentence and placed on the sex offenders’ register.

Social services in Durham and Stockton were made aware of the convictions.

However, the information was not shared between agencies and the family he was living with was not told.

Stockton Borough Council also failed to carry out a proper assessment of the situation.

A family support worker visited the home, despite it being normal practice to send a fully qualified social worker.

The case was later considered closed.

Following the man’s conviction, there were no follow-up visits from any of the agencies to tell the mother she was living with a convicted sex offender.

He went on to sexually assault a young child and is now serving a substantial jail term.

The SCR report, which recommends a series of improvements, says: “There were clear failures to consider the protection of the child and undertake a full assessment at the point agencies became aware of the original offending.”

In a statement, the child’s mother said: “The harm to my (child) cannot be undone and (they) will have to live with the consequences of the various agencies’ failings.

“I sincerely hope that lessons have been learnt from this case and the recommendations made will be implemented and followed to safeguard other children in the future.”

Jane Humphreys, chairwoman of Stockton Local Safeguarding Children Board, said: “Speaking on behalf of all the agencies, we are profoundly sorry for our failures in this case.

“We particularly regret we did not provide the mother of this child with information to enable her to adequately protect them. We are continuing to offer support to the family.

“The well-being of children is of utmost importance and we deeply regret the impact this case had on the child.”

Elaine Lumley, chief officer of the National Probation Service Teesside and Durham, said: “We fully accept the recommendations in the report and, in fact, procedures are now in place to ensure that, in similar circumstances, the joint police-probation public protection unit would take responsibility for contacting the family and ensuring that they are made fully aware of an individual’s offences and have a full understanding of the risks a perpetrator may pose.”

A police spokeswoman said: “Cleveland Police participated fully in the serious case review and is one of a number of agencies that can learn from points emerging from the review.”

A spokesman for Durham County Council said: “The safety and wellbeing of children and young people is a top priority.

“It is clear that for the short period in 2006 when our service was involved, there was a failure to check whether the alleged perpetrator might have contact with other children.

“We would like to offer our unreserved apology to both the mother and child.”

Gail Hopper, chairwoman of the Durham Local Safeguarding Children Board, said: “Durham agencies, which were initially involved with the case, have already taken action to address the failings identified by the Serious Case Review.”

“Other agencies have also been made aware of the findings to ensure that learning is shared as broadly as possible.”