Marc Dougherty married his second wife in the USA without divorcing his first, who he had wed in Hull nearly 20 years earlier
14:28, 03 Jul 2026Updated 14:29, 03 Jul 2026
Marc Dougherty outside Liverpool Magistrates’ Court(Image: Liverpool Echo)
A bigamist was reported to the police when one of his mothers-in-law saw pictures of his illegal second wedding in Las Vegas on Facebook. Marc Dougherty flew to the USA to enjoy a romantic marriage in a scenic former gold mine in Nevada on Independence Day.
But it subsequently transpired that the businessman had become wed to his second wife without divorcing the first, whom he had married in a registry office in Hull nearly 20 years earlier. Having “buried his head in the sand” a judge told him as he walked free from court today: “You simply, deliberately did not bother, whether you didn’t think of the consequences or because you weren’t willing to invest the time and money required.”
Liverpool Crown Court heard this afternoon, Friday, that Dougherty, of Acorn Street in Newton-le-Willows, married his first wife Samantha Todd at a registry office in Kingston-upon-Hull in September 2006. The 54-year-old defendant later applied for divorce in November 2020, citing adultery.
Lucy Moran, prosecuting, described how Ms Todd did not accept the annulment on these terms but “would not challenge the divorce”. However, Dougherty never formally completed the process before marrying his second wife, Pamela Lewis, at Nelson Ghost Town in Nevada on July 4 2024.
This also involved him falsely declaring, in a form submitted to the State of Nevada three days earlier, that he had been divorced since June 2019 and was in possession of a decree absolute, the final confirmation of a completed annulment. First contacted by police in September 2024, he failed to supply the document either at this time or during two subsequent voluntary interviews.
Following his arrest in December 2024, Dougherty told detectives in a third round of questioning that his relationship with Ms Todd had ended in 2018 “because she had cheated on him” and maintained he had received the decree absolute in a hard copy and via email in July 2019. He also claimed to have supplied this to the authorities in Nevada ahead of his second marriage, although the state’s county clerk later confirmed that no proof of divorce had been supplied by him.
Dougherty has a total of 11 previous convictions for 16 offences, including theft in 2005, breaching a non-molestation order in 2020 and drink driving in 2024. Bernice Campbell, defending, told the court that her client had his own business with nine employees, adding: “To say that the defendant puts his head in the sand and cannot deal with things is something that the court doesn’t like to hear.
“The defendant did start to do the right procedure. He was tackling it in the right way. His life was just going out of control. He has had issues with drinking and his mental health and suicide attempts. He has gone from being in a marriage of some longevity to not. Adultery was the point that broke the marriage.
“He thought that he had done enough. He then met somebody he knew, rekindled a relationship and got married. When he got married, the pictures appeared on Facebook. They were picked up by his ex mother-in-law, who reported him to the police.
“His wedding reception in the UK, two of his children from his first marriage came. Perhaps that shows the naivety, the ignorance, the mess that this was. He accepts why this was not the correct way, that he should not have remarried again.
“He started off with the right procedure and then just let it all unravel, as did his life. He also, sadly, has cancer. When I speak to him, he is polite. He is very nervous and upset with the situation and hopes to move on with his life.”
Dougherty admitted bigamy on the day that he was due to stand trial. Appearing in the dock wearing a black polo shirt and sporting short grey hair, he was handed an eight-week imprisonment suspended for a year with 100 hours of unpaid work and £1,000 in court costs.
Marc Dougherty outside Liverpool Magistrates’ Court(Image: Liverpool Echo)
Sentencing, Judge Louise Brandon said: “When you married your current wife, you were still married to your first wife, which you were well aware of. You made a decision, after being told that your wife would not contest a divorce, not to make the necessary applications and obtain that divorce. It appears to me that you simply disengaged from the process.
“You simply, deliberately did not bother, whether you didn’t think of the consequences or because you weren’t willing to invest the time and money required. This is not a case where your actions had a detrimental impact on your first wife. You remain married to your second wife. There is no evidence that you were trying to cause your first wife harm by not obtaining a divorce.
“There are factors which do increase the seriousness of this offence. You did deliberately mislead the authorities in Nevada. You were evasive with the police in this country, which resulted in valuable police time being wasted in chasing you. You have previous convictions, albeit of a dissimilar nature.”
Referring to a pre-sentence report compiled with Dougherty by the Probation Service, Judge Brandon added: “I note that you make efforts to minimise this offending. You claim that you thought you were divorced. I am told you do not seek to pursue that assertion. It is concerning that, even at this stage, you are being less than honest.
“You have your own company. It is reported, if you are sent to custody today, that would have a detrimental impact on the business. It would likely collapse. You have caring responsibilities towards your step children and your own children from your first marriage.
“It appears that this marriage has played a significant part in the improvement in your mental health. You have now resolved substance misuse issues which contributed, in part, to the poor decision making at the time. You do have physical and mental health problems. You are assessed as posing a low risk of reoffending. There has been no further offending since this.
“This court is now required to suspend any sentence of 12 months or less, unless one of the reasons detailed in the guidelines permit the court to disapply that presumption. Those factors do not apply in this case. This court is now obliged, and must, suspend that custodial sentence.”