Edinburgh law student who carried out sex attacks on schoolgirls as teenager fails in bid to overturn Scottish Government Ministers’ ban on working with children
David Alexander, who is 19, was convicted of three statutory sexual offences committed on girls when he was at a secondary school in the Western Isles, between April 2015 and June 2017.
The aspiring lawyer, who later left the islands to attend university in Edinburgh, argued he would be stigmatised by having his name on the children’s list and that it would affect his pursuit of a career in the legal profession.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdA civil case was heard in Lochmaddy Sheriff Court by Sheriff Gordon Lamont in November.
In a written judgement published this week, Sheriff Lamont dismissed Alexander's appeal and concluded: “The pursuer (Alexander) lacks a proper understanding of consent, shows little empathy or remorse and lacks insight into his offending behaviour.”
Alexander was convicted of offences in October 2018 which involved him fondling three teenage complainers. At the time of the offences, the girls were aged between 13 and 16 and Alexander was aged between 14 and 16.
He was given a community payback order requiring 180 hours of unpaid work.
The offences lasted up to 15 minutes, happened in public places and were agreed as fact in the sheriff’s report as involving elements of “power, control, and manipulative behaviour.”
The report said: “At trial, the complainers described in evidence their reaction. This included feeling uncomfortable, not knowing what to do, not wanting to cause a fuss and being upset or embarrassed.”
Emotionally Immature
Social work reports, most recently completed in February 2020, recorded Alexander as presenting a moderate risk, but he never fell into the lowest risk category for sexual offending.
His former social worker also gave evidence that the pursuer showed little remorse for his victims and engaged in “victim blaming” and suggested collusion between the complainers.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe social worker said he could not say if Alexander properly understood consent and described him as an intelligent young man with a potential to achieve, but also highlighted his emotional immaturity.
Alexander maintained he was innocent during his trial and after conviction. He raised an appeal against his listing because he is concerned about his ability to have a legal career and that he would be labelled a “paedophile.”
Lawyers for Alexander argued being placed on the children’s list represented a “disproportionate interference” in his right to private life, and that his listing would stigmatise him and affect his future career prospects.
Sheriff Gordon said there was “insufficient evidence” before the court to determine if his employment prospects would be adversely affected by being placed on the children’s list, in that he had not enquired with the Law Society and there was no evidence led from an employment expert.
Alexander stressed the offences happened when he himself was a child and said he was not attracted to children, did not intend to work with them in future, and was “shocked and “disgusted” to be placed on the list.
The sheriff pointed to a lack of supporting evidence led from any expert in psychiatric, psychological or social work to assess his suitability to work with children.