THE number of registered sex offenders living in Dorset has doubled in less than a decade.

There are now 999 people in the county who are subject to the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). In October 2009, 486 registered sex offenders were being monitored in Dorset communities.

The new figure was revealed in Dorset Police’s annual budget report under ‘management of registered sex offenders’.

As of March 31 2017, 752 sex offenders and 193 violent offenders were subjected to MAPPA requirements in the county.

Sex offenders must notify the police of their name, address and any other personal details. The police must be told of other changes, including of name or address. The criminals are also made the subject of sexual harm prevention orders, which are intended to protect the public by restricting the convicted person’s behaviour.

Courts can also implement sexual risk orders, which can limit travel.

Such orders make it easier for police to track offenders and arrest them for any breaches.

Representatives of Dorset’s MAPPA board, including officials from prisons, the police and the probation service, work with organisations including Circles South West to manage offenders.

Convicted paedophile Andrew Dolman, 36, was recently jailed yet again after forming a relationship with a single mum without telling her his true identity. It is the second time Dolman has lied about who he is to women with children.

The defendant abused two teenage girls and an adult woman. He was sentenced to 10 months in prison in September 2017 after admitting breaching a number of notification requirements of the sex offenders’ register.

Dolman, of Cecil Road in Boscombe, then returned to Bournemouth Crown Court to be sentenced for similar offending last month.

He admitted breaching his sexual offences prevention order and failing to comply with the notification requirements of the register.

Sentencing the defendant to 16 months in prison, Judge Peter Crabtree said Dolman has a “history of disobedience of orders”.

“You have repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with notification requirements, and now your sexual offences prevention order, in circumstances where they are in place for very good reason - that is, to protect young females and female children,” he said.

“You must understand that compliance with these orders is not optional.”