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

Mouseover links for full page descriptions

Offender Databases Peter Drew

Peter Bruce Douglas Drew

Alias

.

Offences

Sexually violated a five year old boy in Auckland in June 2002
Also indecently assaulted a 20 year old special needs woman around the same time
Has since appeared on five charges of breaches of the terms of his extended supervision and breach of a non-association order

Victims

.

Offender Affiliations

Wiliam Hutchinson

Gang affiliations

none known

Age

Born 1984

Current Location

Believed to be back out again and at large in Auckland

Parole/Release Dates

Was sentenced to just 3 years in September 2003
Released from prison August 2006
Later sentenced to a further unknown period for other offending, released September 2010
Now under Extended Supervision for 10 years starting from his release date
Has plead guilty to breaches of the terms of his Extended Supervision in September 2011, currently on bail pending sentence
Sentenced to 10 months for breach of conditions in January 2012

Background
High Court decision here
A psychological report provided to the High Court in Christchurch suggested Drew, given his past history of offending, posed a real threat to young children.

---

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