Description
A man who served a previous prison sentence for sexual activity with a child began communicating with what he believed to be a 14-year-old girl earlier this year.
Richard Clark received a four-year prison sentence at Cambridge Crown Court in March 2016 for offences involving a 13-year-old girl he “met” online, in 2014.
His latest hearing, at Durham Crown Court, was given details of the 2014 offending in which the defendant arranged to meet the girl, went to her school and formed a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship during which he kept asking her for sex.
Although she refused those requests, he did give her a body massage but went no further.
Clark denied a charge of sexual activity with a child but was convicted after trial and, apart from receiving the four-year prison term, he was made subject to an eight-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) plus indefinite notification requirements as a sex offender, as part of the 2016 sentence.
County Durham man fell for vigilante group's online 'sting':
Tabitha Buck, prosecuting, told the Durham hearing that in May this year, just two months after the expiry of the SHPO, Clark used an alias, North East 33, which he had not registered with the police, to go online and contact the profile of someone purporting to be a 14-year-old female.
Unknown to Clark, it was a decoy profile posted by an online paedophile-hunting vigilante group, all members of which were aged above 18.
Miss Buck said Clark began the messages by talking about his work as a truck driver, and the correspondent made it clear she was at school and aged 14.
He said he didn’t mind her age and asked if she liked “older guys”.
Clark complimented her on her profile appearance and told her he liked, “naughty chat”, before going on to say he would like to kiss her and asked if she, “played with herself.”
He suggested they switch their conversation to WhatsApp, so she could see him, and gave her his mobile phone number.
Miss Buck said once on WhatsApp, which was in his name, he told her he liked her and wished he could see more of her.
The conversation continued before Clark blocked the profile.
Details of the exchanges were passed to police by the vigilante group and Clark was arrested before being interviewed at Durham station on May 21, when he denied committing any offences.
The, now, 39-year-old defendant of Chillerton Way, Wingate, denied a charge of attempted sexual communication with a child, when he appeared before magistrates, on May 22, and maintained that plea at his first crown court appearance, in June, when a trial date was set.
But ahead of the trial, Clark changed his plea to guilty at a hearing at the court on October 17.
The sentence was adjourned to allow for the preparation of a background report on him by the Probation Service.
Dr Chris Wood, representing the defendant, told the sentencing hearing the latest offending was over a short period and there had been no attempt to conceal the messaging.
“He accepts he initially failed to admit his offending, but he reconsidered his position and indicated to his solicitors he intended to change his plea.
“That, at least, demonstrates remorsefulness and contrition, as is reflected in the probation report.
“The offence post-dates the original SHPO, during which he complied throughout, with no breaches.”
Dr Wood said the differences between the previous offence, which Clark denied to trial, and the present proceedings, are that he has now admitted his offending and, in this case, there was no actual victim.
He said the defendant retains the support of his family, for which he is the main bread winner, but has been in custody since he changed his plea to guilty on October 17.
Judge Nathan Adams said the defendant’s offending history is, “particularly significant” in this case.
The judge said although Clark complied with the SHPO following the 2016 case, once it expired he was offending similarly within months, believing he was communicating with a 14-year-old girl, unaware it was a decoy.
“Fortunately, it was a decoy, and it was brought straight to police attention.”
The judge said had it been a real 14-year-old, “the risk of harm would have been significant”.
He said the timing of the offence was, “an aggravating feature of the case.”
Imposing a 12-month prison sentence, Judge Adams said he could not suspend it, given the defendant’s previous offence.
“I have every sympathy with your family, but you have caused harm to them.
“It’s so serious only an immediate prison sentence can be justified.”
The judge put in place a new ten-year SHPO, with Clark also made subject to registration as a sex offender, again for ten years.