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

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Phillip Robertson

Phillip Michael Robertson

Alias

.

Offences

Sexual violation (x3), indecent assault (x3) and inducing his stepdaughter to do an indecent act upon him (x2) in Christchurch between 1986 and 1988
Extensively long list of prior convictions including a rape in November 1988, indecent assaults on girls under 16 in 1982 and 1986, a number of assaults and threatening to kill

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

.

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

unknown

Current Location

Prison

Parole/Release Dates

Under preventive detention
Sentence unsuccessfully appealed in July 1992

Background
Robertson's offending against the four year old daughter of his then de facto partner involved penile penetration of her anus, touching her vagina with his tongue and other gross indecencies. For the Court of Appeal Chief Justice Thomas Eichelbaum said reports suggested Robertson was at "high" risk of serious sexual recidivism. He said Robertson had an unfortunate personal history. However Robertson's offending involved a gross breach of trust and that he had a previous record of sexual offending and that a sentence of preventive detention was justified.

---

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