Graeme Dott: Former World Snooker Champion Jailed for Seven Years Over Child Sexual Abuse

Graeme Dott, the Scottish snooker player who reached the pinnacle of his sport by winning the world championship in 2006, has been sentenced to seven years in prison for sexually abusing two children over a period spanning nearly two decades. The 49-year-old was handed the sentence at the High Court in Edinburgh after a jury found him guilty of two charges of lewd and libidinous behaviour involving a girl and a boy.

The offences took place between 1993 and 2010, according to the charges Dott faced. He had consistently denied any wrongdoing and maintained his innocence throughout proceedings, but was convicted following a trial at the High Court in Glasgow. Dott, who is from Glasgow, showed no visible reaction as the sentence was delivered, offering only a nod toward someone seated in the public gallery before security officers led him from the wood-panelled courtroom.

Sentencing judge Lord Harrower told the court that Dott had deprived his victims of "a significant part of their childhood" and that his conduct displayed the classic characteristics of grooming. The judge emphasised that both victims were vulnerable for reasons that went well beyond their young age, and that Dott had used treats as rewards while framing his abuse as a game in order to normalise it.

The court heard that Dott was only 16 or 17 years old when he began abusing the female victim, who was approximately nine years old when the abuse started. His abuse of the second victim, a boy who was about eight, commenced roughly a decade later. According to evidence presented during the trial, Dott warned both children that nobody would believe them if they disclosed what he had done, a tactic commonly used by abusers to ensure silence and continued control.

Lord Harrower said the victims had endured "overwhelming emotions of fear, shame and anger" as a consequence of the abuse, and that these effects had damaged their mental health well into adulthood. He described Dott's behaviour as "a gross violation of trust." As the judge spoke, Dott repeatedly shook his head, apparently in disbelief at the proceedings unfolding against him.

The judge also noted that social work reports had assessed Dott as posing a "below average risk of reoffending." However, because Dott continues to deny the offences, Lord Harrower said he was unable to take any expression of remorse into account when determining the sentence. This lack of acceptance of responsibility is a factor courts often weigh when considering whether a defendant has shown genuine insight into the harm they have caused.

During the trial, prosecutors outlined specific details of the abuse. The court heard that Dott had exposed himself to and inappropriately touched a primary school-aged girl during the 1990s, and that he had attacked a young boy between 2006 and 2010. Dott had previously described the allegations against him as "disgusting" when they first emerged.

The female victim, who is now a woman in her forties, testified that Dott had "caressed" her bottom while giving her a piggyback ride, and that on a separate occasion he had exposed himself to her. She also told the court that Dott once suggested she "take her trousers down" and lifted her top to kiss her stomach after asking whether she wanted to "play a guessing game." She described how Dott would kiss her, touch her inappropriately, and commit a sexual act that, under current law, would be classified as rape.

The woman recounted a vivid sensory memory from the abuse: she recalled the "smell" of creams Dott used to treat a skin condition after he kissed her, and said his actions had left her feeling "shocked and scared." The court also heard that during the period of abuse, Dott bought her a teddy bear decorated with a love heart. Such gifts, prosecutors suggested, formed part of the grooming process by creating a confusing mixture of affection and harm.

Significantly, police had previously contacted Dott about the allegations as far back as 2001, but no charges were brought at that time. It was only when the woman provided a new statement to police in 2025 that the case could be pursued, illustrating how historical abuse investigations can develop when victims feel able to come forward years or even decades later.

Defence counsel Euan Dow told the court that Dott, a father of two, has separated from his wife but "continues to enjoy the support of his family and friends." Dow added that Dott suffers from "long-standing mental health issues" and that both his personal and professional reputations had been destroyed. The court also heard that Dott had already been subjected to threats while in custody and had been moved to a different prison as a result.

The seven-year sentence has been backdated to 24 August, the date Dott was remanded in custody following his conviction. He will remain on the sex offenders register for the rest of his life, a requirement that reflects the serious nature of the offences and the ongoing risk assessments associated with sexual offending.

Speaking after the sentencing, Procurator Fiscal Faye Cook of the Crown Office said Dott had achieved success and public admiration but had privately exploited the trust of two children in order to abuse and coerce them. She described his criminal behaviour as his downfall and said he now faces the consequences of his actions. Cook added that "justice has no time limit" and urged any victims of historical abuse to come forward and report it, regardless of how much time has passed.

Dott's fall from sporting grace is stark. He reached the summit of professional snooker by winning the World Championship in 2006, a victory that made him a household name in Scotland and earned him admiration from fans worldwide. That legacy now sits alongside a criminal conviction for offences committed against vulnerable children, a contrast that underscores how public achievement offers no protection against accountability for private wrongdoing.

The case also highlights broader issues surrounding historical sexual abuse, delayed reporting, and the importance of victims being heard even when allegations were previously investigated without charges being brought. The court's decision to impose a substantial custodial sentence, a lifelong registration requirement, and a backdated term reflects the gravity with which the justice system now treats such offences, regardless of when they occurred.