Latest Offenders Warwick

Description

A vile troll who bullied underage girls into sending him naked pictures has been spared jail because he was just 16 when he began his cruel online campaign.

Daniel Crowley, 18, of Wellesbourne, Warwickshire, threatened and manipulated five girls - aged between 12-15 - from across the UK in a year-long campaign of online abuse.

He posed as boys called 'Tom Phillips' and 'Dan' and then forced the victims into sending him naked pictures which he then used to threaten them.

Crowley was finally caught after several schools and colleges across the UK warned pupils about a social media troll targeting young girls.

He admitted four charges of controlling children and causing a child to engage in sexual activity and three offences of making indecent images of children.

Crowley initially pleaded guilty to four charges of controlling children, subjecting them to sexual exploitation. 

 But Judge Sylvia de Bertodano asked the Crown Prosecution Service to reconsider whether the sexual exploitation charges were the appropriate offences, so they were replaced by four further charges of causing children to engage in sexual activity. 

She then allowed him to vacate his pleas to the original offences, and he pleaded guilty to the new charges – after which she gave him a three-year community order and ordered him to sign the sex offenders' register for five years at Warwick Crown Court on Monday.

Judge de Bertodano said: 'You did what young people are very able to do very easily these days, and that is create a lot of social media accounts.

'But what you used it for was to create accounts in different names and to contact girls, and over the year or so this continued, your contact with them became very serious offences.

Judge de Bertodano said: 'You did what young people are very able to do very easily these days, and that is create a lot of social media accounts.

'But what you used it for was to create accounts in different names and to contact girls, and over the year or so this continued, your contact with them became very serious offences.

'These are really serious offences. These children were between 12 and 15, and they were desperately frightened by what you did.

'You cruelly abused them over a year-long period.

'This is the nightmare that parents of teenagers face, that their children can be exposed to this type of behaviour online - and that when we believe they are safe in their bedrooms, they are being subjected to sexual manipulation like this.

'If you were an adult, you would be looking at a sentence approaching double figures. But I have to treat you as a child.

'I have to consider what the benefit of sending you to prison today would be, and I don't think anyone would be protected in the long term if I were to do that.'

The court heard Crowley contacted the girls using fake social media accounts.

Prosecutor Daniel Wright said: 'He asked them to send images of themselves committing sexual acts, and kept them and used them to coerce the girls to send further images.

'He used various identities, sometimes encouraging them to contact other people who were also, in fact, him.

'That enabled him to exercise control over them in a bullying manner, and he also used threats of self-harm if they refused to do as he requested.'

The first girl police spoke to said Crowley contacted her in 2016 and demanded she send him pictures of her in her underwear.

When she did he ordered her to send him more and threatened to kill himself if she refused.

Crowley also sent images of a naked woman to her friends, claiming it was her, he warned her she was 'not safe,' so she sent him a naked picture.

Another of his victims was so scared of him she sent him 50 pictures of herself to him after he repeatedly used threats if she refused.

Crowley even used other fake accounts to taunt her about the naked pictures to make the victim believe the snaps were being widely circulated.

Another girl sent him images of her bare breasts, and he threatened that if she did not send more, he would show them to other people.

Mr Wright said when Crowley was arrested his phone was seized, and on it were a number of downloaded indecent images including ones showing penetrative sex acts with toddlers.

In a victim impact statement, one of the girl's mothers told Crowley: 'You have stolen the daughter I had, slowly and systematically.

'She has shut down from all she enjoyed, and she has also been self-harming because of the torment you put her through.'

Delroy Henry, defending, said: 'What he did was cruel, really cruel.

'It is a sad testament of the technological age we now live in that it was done with such ease.'

Description

A former North Leamington teacher and youth club leader has walked free from court despite sexually assaulting four girls more than 25 years ago.

Because repeated abuser David Wesley has been found to be suffering from dementia, a judge at Birmingham Crown Court had his hands tied over how to deal with him.

With no other options available to him, Judge Patrick Thomas QC had to give Wesley an absolute discharge despite the fact that the offences would normally attract a prison sentence of many years.

However, he will have to register as a sex offender for five years, and was made made subject to a sexual harm prevention order, also for five years.

Wesley, 66, of Offchurch Road, Cubbington, Leamington, had denied a total of 21 charges including indecent assaults on girls under the age of 16 and on girls under the age of 14.

He first appeared at Warwick Crown Court as long ago as December 2016 when it was said he had committed offences against the four girls on dates between 1977 and 1992.

At that time Wesley was a teacher at North Leamington School, and was also involved as a youth club leader at Cubbington Methodist Church.

Wesleys barrister Scott Coughtrie asked for Wesley not to be arraigned at a previous hearing because the papers in the case had only recently been served on the defence.

Judge Stephen Eyre QC commented: He knows whether he has or has not committed these offences.

Mr Coughtrie, who said it was a very complex historical case, indicated: This is going to be a trial.

At a later hearing Wesley pleaded not guilty to the charges, and was to stand trial at the end of October last year.

But two weeks before it had been due to start, the trial had to be adjourned after the court was told that Wesley was in hospital.

He was subsequently found to be suffering from dementia and, on the evidence of two psychiatrists who had examined him, mentally unfit to stand trial in the normal way.

Instead, a trial of fact took place at Birmingham Crown Court, where a jury was asked to decide whether he did the acts alleged, rather than whether he was guilty of them.

In relation to 16 of the 21 allegations, they found that he did the acts - although in law that is not a conviction.

And because of the finding that he was unfit to stand trial, there were only three possible disposals a hospital order detaining him in a psychiatric hospital under the Mental Health Act, supervision in the community or an absolute discharge.

But a hospital order can only be imposed if the person is suffering from a condition which is treatable.

After an adjournment for the options to be considered, Judge Thomas observed: A hospital order isnt appropriate because his health condition cannot be helped.

And he said that, again because of Wesleys dementia, supervision was not an option, leaving an absolute discharge as the only option.

Description

A BISHOPS Itchington man has been jailed for raping three women.

Nicholas James Holland, age 34, pleaded guilty to three counts of non-recent rape offences at Birmingham Crown Court on February 6.

He was sentenced to 19 years imprisonment and ordered to sign the sex offenders register for life.

The first victim came to police in 2016 and reported that Holland had raped her. She named the two other victims who were contacted by police.

The other two women were reluctant to speak to police but after being reassured they also disclosed offences committed by Holland.

Det Sgt Gareth Unett, said: Holland preyed on young women and the impact on their lives has been devastating. They bravely came forward to report the crimes to police despite the time that had passed. They should be commended for their actions which have helped protect the wider public.

This case highlights that no matter what length of time has passed, the public should feel reassured that Warwickshire Police will thoroughly investigate non-recent offences, supporting victims throughout.

While two of the victims were initially reluctant to talk to police, specially trained officers worked closely with them to provide reassurances and the bravery of all the women ensured Holland faced justice.

Description

A Southam father has avoided jail after pleading guilty to possessing 385 indecent images of children, with some as young as five.

Christopher Brown, 28, of Ploughman’s Holt, Southam, was caught after an exchange of texts with a 14-year-old girl led to the police discovering hundreds of indecent images of girls on his phone.

But despite a conviction last year for exposing himself while shouting at women passing his home, Brown was sentenced to 12 months in prison suspended for two years after his guilty plea to three charges of possessing indecent images at Warwick Crown Court.

He was also ordered to do 150 hours of unpaid work, to take part in a sex offender programme, and to register as a sex offender for ten years.

Prosecutor Andrew Wallace said that in July last year texts sent to a 14-year-old girl were traced to Brown’s phone, which was seized by the police.

Although there was no charge arising from the texts ‘because there was no co-operation,’ a number of indecent images of children were later found on his phone.

The court heard Brown had entered his pleas on the basis that he had not set out to search for the material, but had started receiving it through a social media group which shared adult pornography.

Although Brown said he had only been in the group for about two weeks, Mr Wallace pointed out that the images were ‘still something he has deliberately had to save.’

He added that in January last year Brown was in court for offences of exposure after he stood at the window of his home while shouting at passing women to get their attention.

He was given a 10-week suspended sentence for those offences, and in August was ordered to serve five weeks of that after failing to comply with supervision requirements.

Kate Hatton, defending, said: “He initially went onto the site with the view that he would be able to develop relationships.

“He then ventured into part of the site which contained pornography. He didn’t think at that point that he would be receiving anything other than adult pornography, but he was sent large amounts of material, some of which was child porn.

“He should have had no further involvement, but sadly he did, and he continued to view the material over the course of several weeks.”

Sentencing him, Recorder Kevin Hegarty QC told Brown: “Why you went on to keep those images, albeit for a relatively short period, is not really explained in the pre-sentence report, and you have not as yet faced up to what you interest was in those images.

“One would have thought the fact that you are a father of a young child would have made it plain to you how desperately wicked the creation of these images is.”

Description

When the police seized a mans computer they found movie clips of children as young as one being sexually abused by adults.

But a judge has decided the public will be better protected by Daniel Taylor having treatment and doing unpaid work than by him being jailed.

Taylor, 26, of St Marys Crescent, Leamington, had pleaded guilty at Warwick Crown Court to three charges of making indecent images of children.

He was given a three-year community order and ordered to take part in a three-year sex offenders treatment programme, and to do 60 hours of unpaid work.

Recorder Christopher Hotten QC also made Taylor subject to a rehabilitation activity for 30 days and ordered him to register as a sex offender for five years and to pay 600 costs.

What did the judge actually say?

Sentencing Taylor, Recorder Hotten told him: The seriousness of what you did is that without consumers, theres no market.

Everybody who downloads images such as these helps to create a market and provides a reason for children to be abused in the appalling way these children were.

That is what you have done. Sitting alone in your room, it isolates you from what is going on all to children over the world in appalling circumstances.

But it seems to me the most important thing is to do what can be done to deter you from behaving in this way in the future.

Although this clearly passes the custody threshold, the public is likely to be better protected by my not sending you to prison today.

What was the evidence?

Prosecutor James Dunstan said that in August 2015 the police went to Taylors home after receiving intelligence that someone at the address had been downloading indecent material of children.

The door was answered by his partner, but when the officers then spoke to Taylor he told them they would find images on his red laptop, and showed them where it was.

The laptop and a memory stick were seized, and Taylor, who had downloaded images using a file-sharing app, was arrested.

When the police examined the laptop and the memory stick they found a total of 245 indecent images of children, all but five of which were movies.

They were all accessible to the user, not having been deleted after being viewed, and had file names which were explicit about their content, said Mr Dunstan.

There were 110 category A images showing children being subjected to the worst kind of abuse, along with 128 category B images and seven category C images.

And Mr Dunstan said that explicit search terms used by Taylor showed he had specifically been looking for indecent images of both girls and boys.

When he was interviewed Taylor admitted he had downloaded a couple of hundred images of children over the previous six to nine months, which he said he had initially done out of curiosity, but admitted getting sexual satisfaction from them.

Anything said in mitigation?

Andrew Tucker, defending, conceded: The offences themselves, of course, are horrible in their nature.

But he said Taylor, who had not distributed any of the material, had shown complete and utter frankness directing the police to the laptop and making highly significant admissions.

He has shown remorse, and he does have insight and understanding into what hes done.

Description

A MANIPULATIVE sexual predator raped a young girl whose mother he had met through a dating website and threatened to kill her familys dog if she told anyone.

In what a judge described as the grossest breach of trust, the man, who cannot be named to protect the identities of his victims, also sexually abused the girls two sisters.

The 47-year-old, of no fixed address, pleaded guilty at Warwick Crown Court to raping the girl when she was 14 or 15 and a number of offences of sexual assault.

He was given an extended prison sentence of nine years in jail, of which he will have to serve at least two-thirds, after which he will be released on licence for the rest of the term and for an additional three years.

He was also ordered to register as a sex offender for life and banned from entering Rugby for 15 years.

Prosecutor John Hallissey said a relationship developed after the girls mother met the man through a dating website.

But after they moved in together there were intermittent disclosures by the girl to a friend, and the matter was reported to school staff, only for her to withdraw what she said.

When she was 13 she made a further disclosure at school, asking for her abuser to be present with a view to confronting him, but withdrew her complaint when her mother turned up as well.

But eventually the police became involved and she took part in a video-recorded interview in which she described how she had been systematically abused after the defendant had moved in.

On a number of occasions he walked in on her when she was in the bath or the shower and touched her inappropriately, after which he would be apologetic.

But on one occasion when she was 13 or 14 he called her into his bedroom and pushed her down onto the bed, and when she tried to get up, he pushed her back down and put a pillow over her face, telling her to shut up or he would hurt her.

Her abuser had told her that whenever he acted in that way he tried to imagine she was his real daughter so that he would stop, but that a red mist descended over him.

But he ignored her desperate attempts to tell him she was his daughter and that he could fight the red mist, and performed a sex act on her before calming down and apologising.

Sometimes after he abused her, he would cry and she found herself in the strange situation of having to comfort him.

He also subjected her to threats when she did something wrong, telling her he would tell her mother unless she was his for a period of time.

On another occasion he followed her into the bathroom, ordered her to take off her clothes and then to perform a sex act on him, but she refused.

Then on a day when she was off school sick, she woke up with him lying next to her and touching her.

The girl told him to get off, but he told her if she did not comply he would hurt her mother or kill the dog.

She tried to get away but he pulled her back and raped her.

Mr Hallissey said that after the girl came forward, her sisters also revealed the defendant had inappropriately touched them when they were 13 or 14.

Graeme Simpson, defending, said: He has struggled with his demons, even at the time of committing these offences.

But Judge Richard Griffith-Jones said: He spotted she was a good-natured as well as a sensitive and intelligent girl, and one way of manipulating her was to make her feel sorry for him as well as by being intimidating.

And he told the defendant: You were a sexual predator, and a clever and manipulative one at that.

You set the parameters by a mixture of bribes and threats, sometimes emotional and sometimes physical, and it went on for years. It is the grossest breach of trust.