46-year-old convicted of sexual offences on young women
A 46-YEAR-OLD man has been found guilty of a string of sexual offences against three young women.
David Phillips sexually abused two 17-year-olds in 2004 and went on to abuse one of the women again in 2007.
-
He also sexually abused a 16-year-old in 2004.
He was arrested in 2008 and after an 18-month investigation was charged with four counts of sexual touching.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
Phillips, of Bennett Street, Long Eaton, denied all the charges, but was convicted by a jury at Nottingham Crown Court.
Judge John Burgess adjourned the case for pre-sentence reports and Phillips was remanded into custody until his next appearance on June 4.
Detective Inspector Kevin Buxton said: "Phillips was in a position of trust in respect of all these young women and he took it upon himself to betray that trust.
"He preyed on their vulnerabilities to fulfil his own sexual desires and at no time spared a thought for the harm and upset he was causing.
"There can be no excuse for his behaviour and thanks to the bravery of these women in coming forward, justice can now be done."
All four offences were committed in Clifton, where Phillips used to live.
Comments
by t***s, neverland
Tuesday, May 18 2010, 10:29AM
“sum people think wot they want regardless, people just like to spread evil millus things but the people involed know,and they the 1 suffering. people shud just grow up n stop actin like kids but then again it is clifton and we all have nothing better to do”
by m, gedling
Sunday, May 16 2010, 8:49PM
“it says they are 17+ ,anyone over the age of 16 is capable of consent, anyone under isnt capable,
that is the reason why doing my duty's post made sense to the story.
what part dont you understand ? do you wish me to type slower and louder ?”
by n o p, q r s t....
Sunday, May 16 2010, 1:34PM
“quote from 'm' gedling
doing my duty,that explains alot then, seeing as the legal age of consent is 16 and nowhere does it say against their will,
and if a child was under 16 then they are incapable of giving their consent as they are minors.
Does m stand for moron or moronic ?”
by m, gedling
Saturday, May 15 2010, 2:49PM
“and speaking of typo errors ,spare a thought for poor mr fuller
http://tinyurl.com/36q8m2d”
by m, gedling
Saturday, May 15 2010, 2:39PM
“doing my duty,that explains alot then, seeing as the legal age of consent is 16 and nowhere does it say against their will,
just shows how poor reporting can slant a story.”
by doing my duty, notts
Saturday, May 15 2010, 1:01PM
“i was sat on the jury on this trial, the youngest girl was 14 and not 16 as reported,i was in tears listening to these poor young girls,why put them though this again!!,”