escalating violence in our community Become a member of the Sensible Sentencing Trust

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Dion Lal

Dion Jason Lal

Alias

.

Offences

Indecent assault of a Christchurch woman in 1996.
Two previous convictions for the same type of offence

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

Born 1976

Current Location

unknown

Parole/Release Dates

Sentenced to 6 months in November 1996 with 12 months supervision upon release

Background
Story from the Christchurch Press 23rd November 1996
A 20-year-old man appearing on his third conviction for indecent assault was sent to prison for six months when he appeared in the Christchurch District Court yesterday.

Dion Jason Lal, unemployed, had admitted a charge of indecently assaulting a woman aged 28. He was also sentenced to 12 months supervision on his release from prison Judge Neil Hattaway said Lal had previously appeared in the Youth Court, and in 1994 on a similar matter, and had been sentenced to supervision and counselling.

The probation officer had again recommended supervision but the judge said the wider interests of the community had to be considered. Lal had continued to offend despite the intervention of people who were trying to help him.

---

Corrections and Additional Information
We endeavour to make this database as accurate as possible, but we are at the mercy of whatever information we can find in various online and offline archives. We rely on the public - that is, people like you - to fill in the gaps that we cannot. If you wish to submit additional information or a correction to this file CLICK HERE . Privacy: Trust policy is that all sources are treated as strictly confidential unless we are explicitly told otherwise. If you wish to see a file removed from this database certain conditions must be met by the offender set out HERE Note that this does NOT apply for those that are the primary offender in a murder, rape, or any sexual offending involving minors. We do not enter into correspondence regarding the guilt/innocence of offenders. Such correspondence is not responded to, especially if the offender concerned has a number of prior convictions

Back to Top