A convicted paedophile who abducted a six-year-old girl from her bath before subjecting her to a horrific sexual assault is set to face his sixth parole review next month.

Peter Voisey, now 54, was handed three life sentences in 2006 for the brazen attack at the child’s home in Willington Quay, Wallsend, North Tyneside. He has spent approximately two decades behind bars since his conviction at Newcastle Crown Court.

The Parole Board has scheduled an oral hearing for February to consider whether the former driver from Blyth, Northumberland, can be released into the community.

The Attack

The shocking incident occurred on the evening of 27 December 2005, whilst the young victim was playing happily with her toys in the bath. Her mother was in the next room putting the girl’s toddler brother to bed when Voisey crept into the family home through the back door.

According to reports from the investigation, the mother heard her daughter ask, “What are you doing here?” before an eerie silence fell over the bathroom. Voisey had placed his hand over the child’s mouth to prevent her from calling out.

The girl was bundled into a red Vauxhall Astra and driven around the Wallsend area for approximately 15 to 20 minutes. During this time, Voisey parked twice and raped and sexually assaulted the child on both occasions.

She was later abandoned naked in a back lane, just streets from her home. A local resident, Geoffrey Brown, discovered the terrified, shivering child crying for her mother after hearing sounds from the street.

The mother had made a frantic 999 call upon discovering her daughter missing. Around nine minutes later, police received a further call from a nearby couple who had found the child.

The Investigation

The case triggered what was described at the time as the largest manhunt undertaken by Northumbria Police. The brazen nature of the abduction generated intense media attention and featured in a national appeal on Crimewatch.

Investigators built their case through a combination of forensic evidence. Partial shoe prints left on the wet bathroom floor matched a rare type of trainer, of which only five pairs had been sold in the North East that year. Voisey owned a pair.

A partial DNA trace recovered from beneath the girl’s fingernail was assessed as having a high probability of belonging to the offender. Police also recovered Voisey’s diary, which contained an entry for 27 December 2005 reading: “Phew, it’s over. Chill now.”

Voisey claimed the diary note referred to the end of the Christmas period. He alleged he had been out buying cannabis at the time of the kidnapping, but friends he named refused to support his account. Mobile phone records further undermined his alibi, showing he was not in the location he claimed.

His red Astra had been scrapped before investigators could examine it.

Previous Convictions

Voisey was already a registered sex offender at the time of the attack. He had been convicted in 2001 of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl in a swimming pool changing room in Cheshire.

Police had previously known him as a “sneak thief” who committed high-risk burglaries. Despite his history, he had at one stage been classified as a low-risk offender due to apparent good behaviour under supervision.

Sentencing and Appeals

Following his conviction for rape, sexual assault and abduction, Voisey was sentenced on 20 October 2006 by Judge David Hodson. Members of the jury were reported to have been reduced to tears by the harrowing evidence.

Judge Hodson, sentencing the then 34-year-old, imposed life imprisonment with a minimum term of 10 years before eligibility for parole. The judge warned Voisey he might never be released from prison.

Voisey later mounted an appeal against his sentence, but his bid was refused by the court.

The Parole Process

A Parole Board spokesperson confirmed: “An oral hearing has been listed for the parole review of Peter Voisey and is scheduled to take place in February.”

The spokesperson explained that decisions “are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community.”

Panel members will examine a wide range of evidence, including details of the original crime, any signs of behaviour change, the harm caused and the impact on victims. They read and digest hundreds of pages of reports ahead of each hearing.

Witnesses providing evidence include probation officers, psychiatrists, psychologists and prison offender supervisors, as well as those providing victim personal statements. The prisoner and witnesses are questioned in detail during hearings that often last a full day or longer.

The spokesperson stressed: “Protecting the public is our number one priority.”

The case prompted a review of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) used to monitor sex offenders and other dangerous individuals in the community.

The victim’s identity remains legally protected and cannot be named.