A mother has said she is ‘gobsmacked’ the man found guilty of sexually abusing her little girl won’t get a criminal record because he wants to be a dentist.

Christopher Daniel, 18, was found guilty of numerous sexual assaults on the girl, six, over a two-year period.

But he was allowed to walk free from court and won’t be put on the sex offenders’ register because a judge said he would ‘probably be unable to continue his university course’.

Christopher Daniel, 18, was found guilty at Dumbarton Sheriff Court of numerous sexual assaults on the same girl over a two-year period, but was given an absolute discharge

Part-time judge Sheriff Gerard Sinclair at Dumbarton Sheriff Court in Scotland gave the teenager an absolute discharge, meaning he will have no criminal record.




His victim’s mother later told the Daily Record: ‘I am absolutely gobsmacked by this.

Wages could be 'topped up' when furlough ends in German-style scheme

‘He says that my daughter appears not to have suffered any “long-lasting effects”. How can he possibly know this?

‘No-one has asked me at any point how my daughter is.’

Daniel first abused his victim in 2016 and is currently studying to become a dentist.

Defending the decision, the Justice Office for Scotland said: ‘In light of the evidence as to the immaturity of the accused, and the nature of the discussion during which he admitted his actions, the sheriff considered the offence to be the result of an entirely inappropriate curiosity of an emotionally naive teenager rather than for the purpose of sexual gratification.

Sheriff Gerard Sinclair made the decision to let Daniel walk free from court

‘The accused had appeared both noticeably immature and socially awkward, features confirmed by other evidence in the case.

‘It was fortunate that the complainer appeared to have suffered no injury or long lasting effects.’

How the new lockdown rules differ in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

It said any recorded conviction for the offence would have ‘serious consequences in terms of the accused’s future career’ and any sentence would mean Daniel would ‘probably be unable to continue his university course’.

Thousands of people have now signed a petition calling for a review of the decision, claiming it ‘puts criminals’ careers before our childrens’ welfare’.

‘What kind of world do we live in that this is seen as an acceptable decision by the court?’ the petition reads.

‘This decision is wrong. This sets an example for other sexual offenders and for sexual assault victims of what can happen if they come forward.’

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon was told about the case during First Minister’s Questions last week and said sentencing decisions are ‘rightly and properly matters for judges’ (Picture: PA)

Conservative MSP Liam Kerr raised the case at First Minister’s Questions on Thursday, telling Nicola Sturgeon the sheriff’s decision had ‘devastated’ the victim’s family.

Ms Sturgeon said: ‘I absolutely understand the concerns that have been expressed about what has been reported about this sentence, but the sentencing decision in any criminal case is entirely a matter for the judge.

‘The judiciary acts entirely independently on the basis of the facts and circumstances of individual cases.

‘They will take into account a wide range of factors, including the age of the offender and any previous convictions.

‘I understand the concerns, but we must protect the principle in this country that sentencing decisions are not a matter for politicians, however controversial and difficult they can be for the public.



‘Sentencing decisions are rightly and properly matters for judges.’

Got a story for Metro.co.uk? Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk. For more stories like this, check our news page.