June 2016

Pervert jailed after downloading indecent images of children

A BUCKLEY man who denied downloading indecent images of children onto his computer has been jailed.

Philip Willcock, 47, claimed a female friend who he met over the internet must have done it while she was at his home.

But the jury at Mold Crown Court rejected his claims and unanimously convicted him of four charges of making indecent movies of children by downloading them from the internet – three at the worst category A and one at category B.

He was also convicted of possessing 19 indecent images – four at category B and 15 at category C.

Judge Rhys Rowlands yesterday jailed Willcock, of Nant Mawr Court in Buckley, for eight months and ordered him to register with the police as a sex offender for the next 10 years.

A 10-year sexual harm prevention order was also made.

The judge said he had shown no remorse for what he had done and had no understanding of the effect his behaviour had on young children who were abused to satisfy such perverted interests.

Judge Rowlands said a computer tablet had been seized from the defendant’s home but it was not known what was on it because the hard drive could not be examined.

The offending material had been found on a storage card.

Interviewed, the defendant said he knew nothing at all about them although there were also other images of inside his flat and of his pet dog.

The judge said the consequences of conviction were serious for the defendant, but they “paled into insignificance” compared to the suffering and corruption inflicted on very young children being filmed while being abused.

“This was quite disgusting behaviour on your part,” he said.

It was aggravated by the ages of the children involved and by the appalling nature of some of the video images.

They had been stored which meant he could return to them time and again to view them.

Judge Rowlands said he found it difficult to understand why, when he continued to deny the offences, the probation service was suggesting he was motivated to address his behaviour and attend the internet sex offender treatment programme.

“I am asked to draw back from immediate custody. I’m afraid I profoundly disagree,” he said.

“This is simply too serious to be dealt with by anything other than immediate custody.”

At the end of the trial in May, the judge told the defendant the jury must have taken the view he had invented the female friend in order to cover up his own offending.

Prosecuting barrister Paulinus Barnes said police visited the defendant’s home in July 2014.

A computer tablet device was seized and it had not been possible to examine it properly because it was impossible to charge it up.

However, it contained an SD storage card and it was on that card that four video clips were found.

Police originally wanted to speak to the defendant about a picture which had been uploaded onto the internet under the name of a female from the defendant’s IP internet connection address.

He said he had met the woman from Chester on Facebook.

She had been for a coffee and she must have uploaded it.

He claimed to have been given the SD card and had no idea the other items were on it.

The defendant said he had never used it himself.

But Mr Barnes said that other images on the card included some of the defendant’s dog.

The animal was shown on the defendant’s sofa and in front of his television.