Latest Offenders Warwickshire

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.