🔴 SWIFT JUSTICE: AFGAN PREDATOR JAILED 48 HOURS AFTER ELLESMERE PORT ATTACK

Jailed within 48 hours, a 30-year-old Afghan man is locked up after admitting an unlawful sexual touching of a child in Ellesmere Port, prompting swift police action and court response.

A 30-year-old man has been sentenced to 12 months’ immediate imprisonment after admitting the sexual assault of a child in Ellesmere Port, less than 48 hours after the offence was reported.

Afghan national Sayed Hasib, of no fixed abode, pleaded guilty to one count of sexual assault when he appeared before magistrates at Chester Magistrates’ Court on Monday 23 March 2026. The court imposed an immediate custodial sentence following the guilty plea.

The offence occurred shortly before 6pm on Saturday 21 March 2026 on South Pier Road, Ellesmere Port, when police were called to reports that a man had inappropriately touched a 13-year-old girl over her clothing.

Officers attended within minutes and Hasib was arrested at the scene. He was subsequently charged following police questioning.

In sentencing, the magistrates were required to apply the provisions of the Sentencing Act 2026, which came into force the day before the hearing and introduced a rebuttable presumption that custodial sentences of 12 months or less should be suspended.

However, the court exercised its discretion to impose immediate custody, reflecting the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the offender.

The court was entitled to disapply the presumption where it considered there to be a significant risk of harm to the public or where exceptional circumstances justified immediate imprisonment. In this case, the age of the complainant, the nature of the sexual offence, and the defendant’s lack of a fixed address were all factors capable of elevating both culpability and risk.

Under the Sentencing Council guidelines for sexual assault, offences involving children are treated as inherently serious, with the victim’s age constituting a significant aggravating feature.

The court is also required to consider whether a community-based disposal is realistically workable.

A defendant of no fixed abode may be considered unsuitable for a suspended sentence involving supervision, curfew, or electronic monitoring, as there is no stable environment in which such requirements can be enforced.