Four Men’s Child Sex Offence Sentences Boosted After Attorney General’s Intervention
Four men, caught trying to engage in sexual activity with children online, have had their sentences ramped up following a push from then Solicitor General Michael Ellis QC MP. The cases, though unrelated, were all linked by the offenders’ attempts to groom or abuse minors via the internet.
Sentences Under Scrutiny
Each sentence was reviewed under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme and took a joint hearing at the Court of Appeal on 4 March 2021. The court delivered its ruling on 21 April, handing down tougher penalties.
Meet the Offenders
- George Vasile, 40: Messaged what he thought was a 12-year-old girl’s online dating profile (actually an undercover cop). Initially got a 2-year community order with 150 hours unpaid work and rehab. Now bumped up to 2 years’ suspended prison sentence plus original unpaid work and rehab.
- Lee Crisp, 38: Chatted sexually to profiles run by ‘paedophile hunter’ group posing as 13-year-old girls. Arrested in July 2019 after being reported to police. Sentenced to 12 months suspended prison; Court of Appeal doubled it to 2 years suspended, plus compulsory rehab.
- Carl Keirle, 32: Engaged in sexual chats with a 15-year-old. Originally handed a 3-year community order, now upgraded to 2 years 6 months in prison.
- Matthew Millen, 44: Offered £300 to a man (undercover cop) to sexually abuse his daughter. Originally jailed for 3 years, increased to 7 years by the Court of Appeal.
Attorney General Speaks Out
“I was shocked and appalled by the wicked intentions of these men. Thanks to police vigilance, their crimes did not go further. I welcome the Court of Appeal’s decisions in this landmark case.” – Rt Hon Michael Ellis QC MP
New Sentencing Guidelines Set
The Court of Appeal ruled that when defendants intend to harm a child but the child is actually an adult posing as one, sentencing should start based on the harm intended to the fictional child. Judges can then adjust the sentence down from there, depending on the case.
This landmark ruling tightens the noose on would-be child sex offenders targeting victims online—even if the ‘child’ is a stooge.
