Blackpool Man Convicted of Animal Cruelty for Cropping Dog's Ears

A Blackpool man has been convicted of animal cruelty for having the ears of his dog cropped.

Simon Broscombe, 35, of Bela Grove, Blackpool, admitted one charge of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal, contrary to section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

He also admitted charges of allowing another person to carry out a prohibited procedure on an animal, contrary to section 5 of the Act, and failing to ensure the welfare of an animal, contrary to section 9 of the Act.

District Judge Jane Goodwin, sitting at Blackpool Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, 27th November 2019, heard that Broscombe had the ears of six-month-old puppy Tyson cut into points to give him a more "street cred" look.

As a result of information received, the RSPCA was granted a warrant under section 23 of the Act. The RSPCA and police executed the warrant at Broscombe's property on 19th March 2019.

The court heard how Broscombe, when confronted by RSPCA inspector Amy McIntosh, grabbed his phone and tried to delete WhatsApp pictures of Tyson from it.

However, the investigators traced messages from Broscombe, with one stating: "...with big floppy ears. He not the kind of dog I want."

Pictures were also found of Tyson with his ears intact.

RSPCA prosecutor Paul Ridehalgh said: "This dog is a cross between an American pit bull and American staffie.

"The investigators found pictures of Tyson with his ears intact and the defendant knew that ear cropping in the UK is illegal.

"Owners want cropped ears because it makes the animal more intimidating.

"These ears were mutilated and [Broscombe] would not say who did it which obstructed the RSPCA investigating."

Broscombe paid £2,000 for Tyson, who was born in Holland. He described the dog as 'his pride and joy', and forked out £3,000 for a solid gold collar.

Trevor Colebourne, mitigating, said: "My client bought the dog via a breeder thinking it had had his ears cropped in Holland before being brought into the UK.

"He would not name the person who carried out the procedure as he had been given a threat to keep his mouth shut and not be a grass."

Sentencing Broscombe, Judge Goodwin told him: "Despite your claim to be a responsible animal lover you became involved in a seedy operation which was a deliberate attempt to cause suffering.

"You will not name the vet you claim was involved and this dog will have suffered for up to five days."

Broscombe was sentenced to 12 weeks' custody, suspended for 18 months. He was ordered to do 200 hours of unpaid work and pay £600 in prosecution costs and £115 victim surcharge.

An order was imposed banning him from keeping animals for a minimum of seven years.

Ownership of Tyson was transferred to the RSPCA.

RSPCA dog welfare expert Dr Samantha Gaines said: "Ear cropping is a process where ears are removed or surgically altered, usually for the purposes of appearance.

"We do not believe dogs should be mutilated for cosmetic purposes and we'd urge people not to buy a dog with cropped ears as - whether the process was carried out here or overseas - they still will have undergone this very painful process."

Salford Care Workers Convicted of Abusing Dementia Patients

Two callous care workers have been convicted of abusing dementia patients at a Salford residential care home.

Abana Arshad, 23, of Crumpsall, denied a charge of ill-treating a person without mental capacity, but was convicted after her recent trial at Manchester Magistrates' Court.

Amy Greenhalgh, 24, of Eccles, admitted the same charge at an earlier hearing.

Ill-treating or wilfully neglecting a person without mental capacity is an offence under section 44 of the Mental Health Capacity Act 2004.

The offence has a maximum penalty of 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction; 5 years' custody and/or an unlimited fine on conviction on indictment.

The pair worked at Laburnum Court Care Home in Salford, which offers around the clock nursing care for elderly residents with complex medical and mental health needs.

The specimen charges relate to incidents that took place on 15th July 2018, when the pair were working together on Laburnum Court's specialist 31-bed elderly mentally infirm (EMI) unit.

District Judge James Hatton heard that the despicable duo loaded their pockets with gravel to later hurl at their victims. As the gravel rained down the pair laughed and used their mobile phones to capture the distress caused.

Arshad and Greenhalgh are thought to have targeted up to seven of Laburnum Court's elderly residents. They carried out the abuse behind the backs of the unsuspecting colleagues, who were acting professionally and in the residents' best interests.

Workers at Laburnum Court had made the unusual discovery of gravel on the floors of several of the residents' rooms. The mystery was finally unravelled when Arshad was observed filling her pockets with gravel from the driveway outside.

Fearing they were about to be exposed, the pair tried to shift the blame towards some of the residents and branded a senior colleague a "crackhead" in an attempt to discredit their concerns. They also conspired with each other to delete incriminating posts from Facebook and footage from their mobile phones.

In a Facebook exchange Greenhalgh said: "Someone's reported us about stones being thrown."

Arshad responded: "Are you for real? You can't trust anyone in work I swear. Haha. Just say Jack threw something at Cindy. Delete it all off your phone to be on the safe side."

Greenhalgh added: "Did we get all the stones off the floor in the rooms?"

Abana replied: "Don't think anybody will clock that. I'll back you."

A senior Laburnum Court colleague told the court: "One pair of rolled up gloves was thrown at a female resident called Cindy and she thought another male resident called Jack had thrown it and a verbal altercation then broke out between them.

"But it was either Abana or Amy who threw as one admitted it to another carer.

"Later on Jack was in the garden shouting out in what I would assume to be pain. He was saying 'ow' and he became physically aggressive.

"One of the other carers was not able to bring him into the lounge and this was being recorded and Amy and Abana where in the back laughing and recording on the phone in the back of the lounge.

"Later when I went outside on a break I saw Abana, stand up from bending down and put something into her pocket. A couple of stones dropped out of her hand and she put her hands into her pockets and returned through the main entrance.

"Upon returning one of the other residents was shouting: "Stop it. Why are you doing that? Get away". It was over and over again and she was quite distressed.

"Abana and Amy were both there in the doorway of her room. I went into the lady's room and there was some stones on the floor under her chair on in her lap.

"I spoke to her but she wasn't able to tell me what had happened so, I just reassured her. Then I could hear the resident next door shouting: "Stop doing that. Don't throw them at me, don't throw them at me".

"I went into her room and there were stones on the floor. I asked Abana and Amy what they where doing but they were just laughing and didn't give me proper reasons.

"There was a comment made one of the other residents who had been in bed and she tried to chase both of them when they threw stones at her. Abana threw a stone and then blamed another resident."

Robert Stevenson, a mental health nurse at Laburnum Court, said: "I was working in my office and a member of staff came into the office and said she had just witnessed two members of staff throwing stones at residents and filming them.

"Abana had left the building already but I asked for Amy to come to the office to talk to her. I was told Abana had thrown a glove at another resident and I said a report would have to be done and I escorted Amy off the premises.

"I spoke to Cindy and she said somebody threw a glove and there was lots of laughing.

"She said it upset her a bit but as people were laughing she assumed it was "okay." I did know that one members of night staff did say she found some stones in some of the rooms that these events had alleged took place in.

Ashad and Greenhalgh were arrested and interviewed by the police, but gave conflicting accounts and tried to blame each other for the incidents.

District Judge James Hatton said: "Both defendants provided care for people who had mental impairments. They lacked any capacity and not be able to defend themselves.

"Both these defendant lied in interview and blamed each other, two colleagues and sought to shift responsibility onto other residents.

"They clearly knew what they were doing was wrong and amounted to ill treatment. What other inference could I possibly draw from people that are throwing stones and laughing at people they should be caring for.

"Both were present, both were involved and both laughed. They are as guilty as one another and they stand convicted and at risk of an immediate custodial sentence."

Arshad and Greenhalgh will be sentenced next month and the Judge kept all sentencing options open.

Update (15/1/20): Arshad and Greenhalgh have now been sentenced.

Update: Kimblewick Hunt Workers Sentenced for Animal Cruelty

Two Kimblewick Hunt workers have been sentenced for cruelty against a fox.

Ian Parkinson, 64, of Lower Road, Haddenham, and Mark Vincent, 53, of Kimblewick, Aylesbury, originally denied a single charge of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, contrary to section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

The maximum penalty for this offence is 26 weeks custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction.

The pair were convicted at their trial at Oxford Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, 30th October 2019. You can read the facts of the case in our earlier article.

Parkinson and Vincent appeared at the same court this morning for sentencing.

District Judge Kamlesh Rana deemed that the offence was so serious that only a custodial sentence was appropriate.

She told them: "Your activity was deliberate and planned, it involved the use of a weapon involved in the course of assisting an illegal activity.

"You put this fox at substantial risk of further suffering, being released in close proximity to an active hunt."

She sentenced the pair to 12 weeks' custody suspended for 12 months, with 120 hours unpaid work and 12 days rehabilitation activity requirement.

They were also ordered to pay £960 in victim surcharge and prosecution costs.

Update: £200k Theft from Keswick School

A woman has admitted stealing almost £200k from Keswick School.

Ghislain Sharron Smithson, 51, of Sandybeck Way, Cockermouth, originally denied a single charge of theft when she appeared at Workington Magistrates' Court on Friday, 25th October 2019.

Magistrates declined jurisdiction, given the large sum of money involved. Smithson's case was listed for a plea and trial preparation hearing at Carlisle Crown Court earlier today.

During the brief appearance Smithson entered a guilty plea.

Smithson worked as the Finance Manager at the school between 2008 and 2018. She stole £187,599 of school funds by using the school bank account and credit card for her own personal gain and without permission.

Prosecutor Gerard Rogerson said police believe that the theft began as early as 2012, but the Crown Prosecution Service was willing to accept the defendant's guilty plea, entered on the basis that she began stealing from the school two years later in 2014.

The court heard that some of the allegations were around foreign currency transactions, though details were not revealed.

Defence barrister Judith McCullough told HHJ Nicholas Barker: "This lady is a lady of hitherto good character."

The judge told the defendant: "You have pleaded guilty to this charge of theft and I know that you will have been well advised by Ms McCullough as to the range of sentences available to this court."

The maximum penalty for theft is 7 years' custody.

Looking at the theft sentencing guideline this particular offence is likely to be one of higher culpability, given the abuse of trust, and higher harm, given the large sum involved. This would give a starting point of 3 years 6 months' custody.

Smithson will be sentenced on Tuesday, 3rd December 2019.

Update (3/12/19): Smithson was sentenced to 32 months in custody.

Lancashire Benefit Fraudster Spent Month in Australia

A Lancashire woman claimed almost £30,000 in Universal Credit she wasn't entitled to.

Debbie Bowler, 41, of Ruskin Avenue, Colne, admitted one charge of dishonestly making a false statement to obtain benefit when she appeared at Burnley Magistrates' Court last week.

Making a false statement or representation with a view to obtaining benefit payments is an offence contrary to section 13 of the Social Security Administration (Fraud) Act 1997.

The maximum penalty for the offence is 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction, 7 years' custody and/or an unlimited fine on conviction on indictment.

District Judge James Clarke heard that Bowler had notified the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) that the father of her two children had left the family home in March 2016 when their relationship came to an end.

Shortly afterwards her ex-partner returned to the property and resumed living there on a regular basis. Bowler failed to notify the DWP of the change in circumstances and dishonestly claimed benefit payments to the tune of £29,247.

Carl Gaffney, prosecuting, told the court that Bowler, her ex-partner and the two children had flown to Australia for a month-long family holiday.

"Pretty much all of the documentation relates to what we say is a shared property. There were bank accounts going to the shared address", Mr Gaffney said.

Trevor Grice, mitigating, said that Bowler's ex-partner owned the property where she and the children were living. She was suffering depression after her 22-year-old son tragically died in July 2018 and her ex-partner would stay three nights a week to assist with the children.

The solicitor continued: "She is adamant it was only three nights a week. He stayed in the bed and she stayed on the sofa."

Mr Grice went on: "She says she was under a misapprehension. She was under the impression a person could stay at the premises for three days without her notifying the authorities.

"She says on that basis she made the decision to allow him to stay. It was a misunderstanding of the relevant legislation."

District Judge James Clarke acknowledged that Bowler, who had no previous convictions, was under a great deal of personal strain due to the sudden and unexpected death of her son.

Bowler was sentenced to a 12-month community order, with up to 12 days' Rehabilitation Activity Requirement and 10-weeks' electronically monitored curfew.

The DWP is currently recovering the overpayment.

Community Orders: A Good News Story

I vividly remember one of my very first courts as a new winger.

It was a breaches court with dozens of defendants, most of whom hadn't actually bothered to attend, accused of breaching the terms of their community, suspended sentence or post-sentence supervision orders.

Warrants were sought and granted for those that failed to attend, provided we were satisfied at the good service of the summons and absence of any legitimate reason for non-attendance. For each defendant in attendance, the Probation Officer dutifully outlined the circumstances of each alleged breach.

In the majority of cases, those brought before the court were accused of multiple breaches or flagrant disregard of the order they were subject to. The court will have imposed a community or suspended sentence order with the intention of the defendant working with the National Probation Service (or relevant Community Rehabilitation Company) to address their offender behaviour, but in all too many cases that just doesn't happen.

It is depressing the number of cases you hear where the defendant has simply refused to attend for unpaid work, abused their supervising officer or otherwise failed to engage.

It therefore came as a very pleasant surprise to deal with an application by the National Probation Service to revoke a community order because the defendant had made so much progress. Without going into too many specifics, the female concerned had been given a medium level community order for committing an assault.

She had been a troubled young lady, with a lot on her plate. As is often the case, there was a history of substance misuse and there had been breakdown of her family unit. She wasn't heavily convicted. The assault in question signalled an escalation in her offending and her first interaction with the National Probation Service.

The court had ordered her to complete unpaid work and a thinking skills programme and she had grasped the opportunity with both hands. The Probation Officer making the application described how she had attended every appointment on time, well presented, with impeccable manners, a positive attitude and a real desire to succeed.

What's more, she had made her own arrangements to attend counselling to overcome her earlier substance misuse problems. She had sought reconciliation with her family, which had resulted in greatly improved access to her children. She was undertaking training with a definite career path in mind.

It really was heartwarming stuff and we were more than happy to revoke the order and congratulate her on the positive progress she had made. She walked out of the court with a beaming smile and feeling ten feet tall and quite rightly so. I really don't expect to be seeing her back before the court anytime soon and hopefully not at all.

A great example of effective community sentencing. I just wish cases like hers were a bit more common.

Flintshire Chef Cleared of Knife Charges After Genuine Mistake

A Flintshire chef has been cleared of possessing a bladed article in a public place, after Magistrates accepted he had simply forgotten that a knife he used at work was in his trouser pocket.

Gheorghe Nache, 50, denied a single charge of possessing a bladed article in a public place. He appeared at Mold Magistrates' Court for trial last week.

Possession of a bladed article is an offence under section 139(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The offence, which is triable either way, has a maximum penalty of 6 months' custody on summary conviction, 4 years' custody on conviction on indictment.

In accordance with section 139(5) of the Act, it is a defence if the person found in possession of a bladed article can prove that it was in their possession for either use at work, religious reasons or as part of a national costume.

Mr Nache, a Romanian national, lives and works as a chef at Mountain Park Hotel in Flint.

Anouska Youds, prosecuting, told the court that Mr Nache had been involved in an incident outside the Dee Inn, on Chester Street, Flint, shortly after 7 pm on the evening of Sunday, 21st July 2019.

Police were called to the scene and stopped Mr Nache on nearby Sydney Street. Mr Nache, who considered himself the aggrieved party, was said to be obstructive towards the officers, which resulted in them conducting a search under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Mr Nache volunteered that he had a small lock knife in his pocket, which he used for opening boxes as part of his work. The knife was recovered and Mr Nache arrested for the offence.

When interviewed Mr Nache again confirmed that the knife, which had a 6 cm blade, was used for opening boxes as part of his work. He described how he had eaten at the Dee Inn and when he left the pub a group of people outside shouted abuse at him, along the lines of him being an unwelcome foreigner who should go back home.

He went on to say how he had only realised the knife was in his pocket when paying his bill at the pub, but due to the fact it was such a small size, had not considered it would be against the law to have it in his possession anyway.

After leaving the pub shortly after 5 pm, Mr Nache said he was on the phone to his girlfriend in Thailand when he was approached by the group of people, including another Romanian man, who offered to sell him drugs, and when he said no, they became hostile.

Simon Simmons, defending, asked Mr Nache to confirm why he had the knife in his pocket that day. Mr Nache replied that he had been at work until around noon and then went straight to a friend's house. He enjoyed a couple of drinks with his friend before heading to the Dee Inn for a meal and a few more drinks. The knife was to cut packaging from food in the hotel kitchen where he worked.

Mr Simmons said his client had clearly forgotten about the knife in his pocket and had been on his way home when the incident occurred and that there was no evidence he had brandished the knife or threatened anyone with it.

Magistrates accepted that Mr Nache had simply been forgetful in leaving the knife in his trouser pocket. Although some time had passed after Mr Nache realised he had the knife, in the Bench's opinion it was not feasible that he could have discarded it, due it being a tool he needed to carry out his trade.

Mr Nache was cleared of the charge.

Having been involved in similar cases, it is reassuring to see that a hardworking man of good character hasn't been criminalised for making an honest mistake.

Driving Ban for Speeding Premier League Footballer Christian Benteke

Crystal Palace striker Christian Benteke has been disqualified from driving after being caught repeatedly driving at more than twice the speed limit.

Benteke, via his solicitor, admitted three charges of speeding during a recent appearance at Lavendar Hill Magistrates' Court in South London. Benteke was not present, owing to commitments with the Belgian national team.

Speeding is an offence contrary to section 89(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. It is a summary offence with a maximum penalty of a fine at level 3 (£1,000 maximum), which increases to a fine of level 4 (£2,500 maximum) for offences committed on the motorway.

On 20th January 2019, the footballer was clocked driving 80 mph (129 km/h) in a 50 mph (80 km/h) zone in Richmond, before being caught doing 89 mph (143 km/h) in a 40 mph (64 km/h) zone stretch of the same road in Putney on 11th March.

Benteke was also caught driving at 64mph (103km/h) in a 30mph (48km/h) zone in Streatham Place on 22nd July.

The 28-year-old, who is clearly much better at football than he is driving, already had 9 penalty points on his driving licence.

Quentin Hunt, mitigating, told the court: "He is acutely aware that he may be seen by some as a role model for young people and his behaviour should reflect as such, and that the pattern of these speeding offences in unacceptable."

Pamela Stokes, Presiding Justice, said: "Mr Benteke isn't a first time offender, he has three previous offences plus the matters in front of us today.

"We note that Mr Benteke is somebody who has offended before and we have also noticed the very high speeds recorded.

"Mr Benteke is a well known footballer. He has many fans and should be a role model to those fans. His offending has fallen far short of being a role model."

Magistrates endorsed Benteke's driving licence with 6 penalty points for each of the three offences.

He was also disqualified from driving for 12 months.

Salford Man Jailed for Throwing Fireworks at Remembrance Sunday Parade

A man who threw fireworks at the Eccles Remembrance Sunday Parade has been jailed.

Stuart Potts, 38, of Borough Road, Salford, admitted charges of using threatening behaviour, contrary to section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986, and throwing a firework in a public place, contrary to section 80 of the Explosives Act 1875, when he appeared before District Judge Mark Hadfield at Manchester Magistrates' Court earlier today.

An offence under section 4 of the 1986 Act has a maximum penalty of 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction. An offence under section 80 of the 1875 Act has a maximum penalty of an unlimited fine on summary conviction.

Beth Pilling, prosecuting, described how Potts appeared at an upstairs window of the disused Albert Edward pub, which overlooks Eccles war memorial, at 11 am yesterday.

Locals were observing two minutes' silence when Potts, who is understood to have been squatting at the premises, climbed onto the window ledge and set off two fireworks in the direction of the crowd.

A crowd of angry veterans gathered outside the pub window shouting "Get him out!" and trying to break the door of the pub down, with others attempting to climb up to the window. Members of the crowd angrily threw traffic cones in Potts' direction.

A lone police officer struggled to hold the crowd back until further officers arrived on the scene.

The court was read a statement by a Royal Marines veteran attending the event, who said the bangs of the fireworks reminded him of combat and affected his post-traumatic stress disorder.

Abigail Henry, mitigating, said Potts had shown "sincere and genuine remorse for his actions".

Potts claimed he was given the fireworks by someone else and lit them "as a mark of respect" to emulate the volley of shots fired at some Remembrance Day events.

Judge Hadfield viewed matters rather differently, saying: "I rather doubt that anybody in their right mind would think letting them off in the middle of that ceremony was a mark of respect.

"It shows a staggering lack of respect for those attending and those being remembered."

Dad-of-four Potts, who has 21 previous convictions for 39 offences, was sentenced to 16 weeks in custody.

Darlington Man Chased and Assaulted School Girls

A Darlington man has been convicted of pushing two school girls after they rebuffed his advances on a bus.

Allan Francis Slaven, 28, of Tyne Close, Darlington, admitted three charges of assault by beating during his recent appearance at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court.

He also admitted a further charge of criminal damage to a police cell.

Magistrates heard that Slaven made lewd and suggestive comments to the girls as they were travelling home from school on a bus.

One of the girls told Slaven to "shut up" before leaving the bus. Slaven disembarked at the same bus stop and gave chase to the terrified teenagers, shouting threats at them along the way.

John Garside, prosecuting, said: "They get to a car park and one of the girls uses a car to shield herself from the defendant while he is chasing her around it.

"A male friend sees the defendant, known as Skinhead, chasing the girls around the car, and as he approaches the girls run off and the defendant runs after them.

"They run to one of their houses and into the back garden before the defendant kicks open the gate and pushes one of the girls to the ground, the other tries to punch him and he pushes her over.

"The male friend enters the garden and starts arguing with the defendant and both girls try to run. One of them picks up a strimmer to hit the defendant to get him off the friend who was telling him to leave."

At one point during the altercation Slaven headbutted his friend, which accounts for the third assault charge.

One of the girls, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said in a victim impact statement: "It should have been a normal journey home from school, hearing the comments was stressful enough but for him to turn on me was terrifying.

"I was so scared when he was chasing me and I didn't know what to do, I thought he was going to hurt me.

"I also keep thinking what if. What if he had got into the house, thoughts keep going through my head."

John Clish, for Slaven, said: "The defendant is not someone who is without problems himself. He has been diagnosed with ADHD and multiple personality disorder and two or three months ago he was in a coma after suffering a heart attack.

"It's fair to say he has limited recollection of the incident, he was intoxicated. There was an exchange which has unfortunately caused him to act how he did."

Slaven was arrested and taken to Darlington Police Station, where he caused criminal damage by smearing excrement on the wall of his cell.

Magistrates ordered pre-sentence reports.

Slaven was granted conditional bail until his sentencing hearing at the same court on Tuesday, 19th November 2019.

Yorkshire Paedophile Hunters Acquitted of False Imprisonment

An update on a case from earlier this year, concerning members of the Yorkshire-based paedophile hunter group Predator Exposure.

You might remember that several members of the group denied charges of false imprisonment and assault when they appeared at Leeds Magistrates' Court back in February.

The charges related to stings carried out by Predator Exposure in Leeds on 13th January 2019 and Wakefield on 11th August 2018.

According to the prosecution, the group members overstepped the mark as they confronted the suspects concerned. They were said to have acted in an overly aggressive manner, putting the suspects in headlocks and pinning them against walls.

The jury accepted the account of group members, who argued that they had used reasonable force to detain the suspects until the arrival of the police.

On 30th October 2019, after an eight day trial, the group members concerned were acquitted of all charges.

Phil Hoban, 43, who founded Predator Exposure, said: "We are here today to celebrate what we're doing.

"Thank you to everybody for all your support, it's amazing.

"We're all not guilty. Today, we are going to celebrate and this is just the start.

"We will be back very soon, tune in people."

A spokesperson for West Yorkshire Police said after the case: "West Yorkshire Police of course respects and accepts the view of the court.

"It was felt in the public interest to bring this matter to trial and for evidence to be tested by a jury.

"We have repeatedly stated in recent years that protecting children from harm has been a top priority for West Yorkshire Police and that absolutely remains the case.

"Officers always encourage members of the public to report any concerns about illegal internet activity of potential child abusers to us so that we can deal with it.

"We are also concerned about the activities of online child abuse activist groups and their exposure activity in confronting persons they have identified.

"We urge members of such 'exposure' groups not to carry out this activity and instead to report suspected offences in West Yorkshire to the force via 101 or the independent Crimestoppers charity on 0800 555 111."

Norfolk Sixth Former Convicted of Child Porn Offences

A Norfolk sixth former has been convicted of downloading and sharing child porn images via the dark web.

Luke Chapman, 18, of Spirketts Lane, Harleston, admitted two charges of making an indecent image of a child when he appeared at Norwich Magistrates' Court on Friday, 8th November 2019.

Making an indecent image of a child is an offence under section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978. It is an either way offence with a maximum penalty of 10 years' custody on conviction on indictment, 6 months' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction.

Magistrates heard that police obtained a warrant to search the home Chapman shared with his parents in early June.

Information received had connected Chapman's Gmail email address with the attempted upload of indecent images of children to the web. Police seized devices from the Harlesdon property when Chapman was at school. They also visited the school to seize mobile devices in his possession.

Ashley Petchey, prosecuting, said that Chapman had used the Tor network, a browser used for accessing the dark web, to search for pornographic images because he was interested to see how easy it would have been to access them and to see how "messed up people were".

Analysis of Chapman's devices yielded more than 1,000 indecent images and videos of children, some of whom were only 2 years old. Press reports do not indicate the Category of images involved.

The court heard how in the past year he had become addicted to downloading the images but he did not gain any sexual pleasure from doing so.

He admitted to sending the pictures to some others but only did so because he did not want to be friends with them anymore.

Damien Moore, mitigating, said the matter was too serious for the Magistrates' Court to deal with.

Magistrates agreed and sent the case to Norwich Crown Court for sentencing on 6th December 2019.

Chapman was released on unconditional bail until that date.

He was immediately placed on the sex offenders register.

County Durham Man Convicted of Flashing at Popular Beauty Spot

A man has been convicted of exposing his genitals at members of the public at a popular County Durham beauty spot.

David Moore, 24, of Mendip Avenue, Chester-le-Street, admitted three charges of outraging public decency when he appeared at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates' Court.

He also admitted charges of harassment without violence and driving without insurance.

The charges relate to three incidents that took place at Waldridge Fell, Chester-le-Street, between 11th and 26th September 2019.

Magistrates heard that Moore visited the beauty spot, because he had previously had consensual sexual activity with couples and women at the site and was seeking further sexual encounters.

John Garside, prosecuting, said: "One victim was walking her dog on 11th September at around 1.45pm and when she returned to her vehicle and saw a man parked next to her car.

"As she approached the male has asked her where the nearest McDonald's was, she bent down and as she did she seen his hand moving up and down.

"She said it was not something she wanted to see and she quickly got in her car and drove off.

"She said the incident left her feeling spooked and she was worried the defendant might follow her."

Mr Garside added: "The male defendant stood next to another woman and said 'you are looking very sexy this morning' whilst holding his penis and adding 'what do you think of this?'.

"She told him he could put that away for a start and said she was not impressed and not interested.

"She says she was left very shaken and now does not use the area for dog-walking anymore."

The statement of a third victim, who was walking her dog in the same area on the morning of 9th September, was read to the court.

"I stroked his dog and he politely said 'may I say you are looking lovely' whilst grabbing his crotch," the witness said.

In mitigation Moore said that he was ashamed and remorseful about his actions.

Magistrates ordered a pre-sentence report and adjourned sentencing until Tuesday, 12th November.

Moore was granted conditional bail until that date.

Trafford Centre Shop Thief Avoids Custody

A Manchester shop thief has avoided a stint behind bars, despite stealing thousands of pounds worth of goods whilst subject to a suspended sentence order for like offences.

Lauren Andrews, 34, of Newton Heath, Manchester, admitted two charges of theft when she appeared at Manchester Magistrates' Court.

The thefts occurred earlier this year when Andrews targeted high-end stores in the city's Intu Trafford Centre with an unknown male accomplice.

Prosecutor Martha Dowd said: "The victim in June is Victoria's Secret store in Trafford Centre on June 7 at 2.30pm, she entered along with another male and stole around £822-worth of stock comprised of several perfumes, leggings and t-shirts.

"At 7.30pm she re-entered the store and stole more goods to the value of £177.

"On March 8, she entered Abercrombie and Fitch store in Trafford Centre and took 20 fragrances worth £2,360.

"No attempts were made to pay, the defendant went unnoticed and they were not recovered."

Andrews is a habitual shop thief. Last Christmas she stole £8,000 of designer clothing from The White Company and a £1,480 bag from Burberry.

She was convicted of those offences in May and sentenced to 18 weeks' custody, suspended for 12 months.

Less than a month later she was out thieving again in Victoria's Secret.

A report by the National Probation Service noted that Andrews accepted responsibility for her offending, which she claimed was the result of coercion by her former partner. It added that Andrews was taking positive steps to address her substance misuse and was about to make a fresh start by moving into new accommodation.

Karl Benson, mitigating, said: "She is a potential success story for a problem-solving programme, but if she goes to custody today, she will lose the new house that she is due to move into.

"It would be unjust in the public interest and undo all the positives. A community order is exceptional on this occasion - there is clear progress."

Magistrates agreed and decided against activating Andrews' suspended sentence.

She was sentenced to 20 weeks' custody, suspended for 12 months.

She was also ordered to pay compensation of £1,180 to Abercrombie and Fitch and £500 to Victoria's Secret.

Notwithstanding the fact that we do not know the full circumstances of this case, I do find the decision not to activate Andrews' suspended sentence a strange one indeed.

The Bench imposing the first suspended sentence order in May clearly thought that the offences sentenced on that occasion were so serious that an immediate custodial sentence was appropriate, but compelling factors meant the sentence should be suspended. Andrews would have received the standard spiel that any breach of the suspended sentence order would almost certainly result in the activation of the sentence.

She goes on to commit a like offence only a month later (the Victoria's Secret theft; the Abercrombie and Fitch theft pre-dates the sentence imposed in May), which the Bench has again decided was so serious that only a custodial sentence was appropriate, yet she has presumably offered an alternative compelling reason why that sentence should also be suspended.

Readers could be forgiven for thinking that Andrews is saying just the right things to play the system.

Government Seeks to Tighten Mobile Phone Driving Rules

The Government has confirmed that it will legislate to tighten the rules on mobile phone use when driving.

Regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (as amended), which can be read here, prohibits a driver from using a hand-held mobile telephone or other device to call, text or perform any other interactive communication function.

An interactive communication function is defined by the Regulations as any of the following:

(i) sending or receiving oral or written messages;

(ii) sending or receiving facsimile documents;

(iii) sending or receiving still or moving images; and

(iv) providing access to the internet.

Under current rules, any driver caught using a mobile phone or other device for an interactive communication function faces a fixed penalty of £200 and 6 penalty points on their driving licence. The maximum penalty on summary conviction is a fine at level 3 on the standard scale in addition to 6 penalty points.

In recent years drivers caught filming or taking photos have escaped punishment as lawyers have successfully argued this activity does not constitute an interactive communication function as currently described by the legislation.

The revised legislation will mean any driver caught texting, taking photos, browsing the internet or scrolling through a playlist while behind the wheel will be prosecuted for using a hand-held mobile phone while driving.

The Secretary of State for Transport, Grant Shapps, said: "We recognise that staying in touch with the world while travelling is an essential part of modern day life but we are also committed to making our roads safe.

"Drivers who use a hand-held mobile phone are hindering their ability to spot hazards and react in time – putting people's lives at risk.

"We welcome the Transport Select Committee's report, and share their drive to make our roads even safer which is why this review will look to tighten up the existing law to bring it into the 21st century, preventing reckless driving and reduce accidents on our roads."

Research by the Department for Transport's Think! road safety campaign shows that one-in-six drivers on Britain's roads admits to using their mobile phone at the wheel. Travelling at 30 mph, a vehicle will cover 100 feet in the 2 seconds it takes a driver to briefly glance at their phone. It is therefore comes as little surprise that a driver using their mobile phone will takes on average three times longer to react than a fully alert driver.

Nick Lloyd, Head of Road Safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), said:

"Drivers who use their phones are up to 4 times more likely to crash. RoSPA highlighted this loophole in the summer and is delighted that such prompt action is being taken to ensure that all hand-held mobile phone use is to be prohibited, making our roads safer for all.

"This action comes alongside further measures to tackle phone use while driving, including a review of road traffic policing and wider traffic enforcement to look at how roads policing currently works, its effectiveness, and where improvements could be made.

In 2016, the last year for which statistics are available, 35 people died and 137 were seriously injured as a direct result of mobile phone use at the wheel.