Record details
A MAN guilty of sexually assaulting a boy and three counts of breaching his Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) has been jailed.
Malcolm Montgomery, 67, of Llys Esgob Morgan, Is Terfyn, St Asaph was sentenced to 27 months’ imprisonment at Mold Crown Court today (November 29).
The court heard how, in 2006, Montgomery was jailed for seven years at Liverpool Crown Court after sexually abusing a 14-year-old boy, and had a SHPO imposed on him indefinitely.
This prevented him from working with children and being in the company of those younger than 16 unless another adult is present.
But he was accused of repeatedly breaching the SHPO in May and June 2022 by allowing children into his home, enticing them with the prospect of giving them cigarettes and vapes.Â
 Prosecuting, Nicholas Williams said Montgomery sexually assaulted one boy, 13, by touching his penis over his clothes.
He had given children the code to his gate, enabling them to knock on his door, while a neighbour had described seeing several children stood on the path by his gate.
According to the neighbour, “this type of thing was happening quite often”.
A victim had described going to Montgomery’s home with a friend and other boys from the year above him in school, having been told he could get cigarettes from him.
It was not until fifth or sixth occasion, though, that he set foot in Montgomery’s house.
Montgomery asked if he wanted to come in and watch football with him; the boy began to trust him, saying he “kept giving us stuff” they wanted.
He had told Montgomery he was 13, and had sometimes appeared at his address in his school uniform.
The victim went into his house about six or seven times; after a while, Montgomery began to ask questions of a sexual nature which made him and his friends uncomfortable.
After Montgomery touched him on his penis over his clothing, asking if he could get an erection, the victim never returned.
Another child only went in to Montgomery’s house twice, saying it “felt a bit weird sat in an old man’s house”, and that he “asked him weird questions”.
A third child, 12, went to Montgomery’s house on several occasions, once sitting in his living room for about an hour.
Montgomery told her that his wife had died, and that he was “really lonely”, before giving her a necklace.
Following his arrest, Montgomery said one of the children had been visiting his address almost every day for the last few months.
He did not deny that some conversations of a sexual nature had taken place, but claimed these had been initiated by the boys.
Montgomery admitted giving them cigarettes, sometimes while in school uniform, but denied sexual contact with the boy whose penis he was alleged to have touched.
He also added that he could not remember being given the SHPO, or the conditions attached to it.
Defending, Sarah Yates told the court that there was “no real evidence of harm beyond that which he had pleaded guilty to”.
She added: "This man led rather a lonely, isolated life before making repeatedly foolish decisions."
Since being remanded in custody on June 23, Yates said Montgomery has “worked constructively”, and has obtained a job.
He was also said to have been engaging with a mental health team in a custodial setting, as Montgomery is prescribed medication for depression and suicidal ideation.
Given he has family elsewhere, Yates added that it is Montgomery’s intention to move out of North Wales.
Sentencing, Judge Rhys Rowlands added that Montgomery will remain on the register indefinitely, and is banned from working with children or vulnerable adults in future.
A victim surcharge of £190 was also imposed, to be paid upon Montgomery’s release.
Rowlands said: “The bottom line is he is subject to this order. Suggesting he had forgotten about it is nonsense. There is no way he wouldn’t have known the prohibitions.
“It was almost like Fagin’s Den.
“It (SHPO) followed on from very serious, depraved sexual behaviour on your part, and is meant to safeguard youngsters from any repetition.
“Despite that, you breached the terms of that order in May and June of this year, added to which there is a specific offence of a sexual assault against a 13-year-old boy.
“It’s quite clear to me you were seeking to groom them. (It was) totally inappropriate, concerning behaviour.
“I’ve no doubt at all that your behaviour was calculated and deliberate, and to further your worrying, obsessive behaviour with youngsters.
“I’m firmly of the view that your non-compliance with your SHPO makes plain to me that there is no realistic prospect of rehabilitation at present.”Â