Pae­dophile dis­trib­uted sick child abuse videos

Prison for man who worked with pri­mary school kids

Perthshire Advertiser - - FRONT PAGE - Court Re­porter

A pri­mary school learn­ing sup­port worker caught dis­tribut­ing child abuse videos to other pae­dophiles was jailed for a to­tal of 40 months at Perth Sher­iff Court this week.

Forty-four-year-old Stu­art Al­lison, of Tri­nafour, Perth, also had his name added to the Sex Of­fend­ers’ Reg­is­ter for life when he ap­peared for sen­tence.

The court heard that the ac­cused, who worked with vul­ner­a­ble chil­dren as young as eight, had also been down­load­ing child abuse ma­te­rial for more than a decade.

Po­lice seized seven in­ter­neten­abled de­vices when they raided his home on Novem­ber 15 last year.

In­de­cent im­ages of chil­dren, some of the most vile, were found on each of them.

De­pute fis­cal Tina Dickie said that Al­lison is a first of­fender.

He worked with chil­dren aged from eight to 12 years, some of whom had learn­ing dif­fi­cul­ties.

“The po­lice re­ceived in­for­ma­tion that a de­vice, linked to the ac­cused’s home, was in­volved in the dis­tri­bu­tion of in­de­cent im­ages of chil­dren.”

Of­fi­cers ob­tained a search war­rant for his home after re­ceiv­ing in­for­ma­tion that

Stu­art Al­lison some­one at the Tri­nafour ad­dress was us­ing Skype to share graphic child abuse clips.

It emerged that Al­lison had used his Skype ac­count to pass on 100 videos cat­e­gorised as Class A, the most de­praved.

He had also stored al­most 1000 videos which would have taken four days to watch.

Of­fi­cers also re­cov­ered nearly 1500 still im­ages.

Al­lison ad­mit­ted that be­tween Septem­ber 11, 2004, and Novem­ber 13, 2016, at his home, he took - or per­mit­ted to be taken - in­de­cent pho­to­graphs of chil­dren.

He also ad­mit­ted hav­ing the im­ages in his pos­ses­sion be­tween Septem­ber 11, 2004, and Novem­ber 15, 2016.

He pled guilty to a third charge of dis­tribut­ing or show­ing the in­de­cent im­ages be­tween Au­gust, 2015, and May, 2016.

So­lic­i­tor John McLaugh­lin sub­mit­ted that the items he had dis­trib­uted were “small in num­ber” - and the pe­riod cov­ered by that charge cov­ered just nine months.

They had been dis­trib­uted to peo­ple in chat rooms and his client ac­cepted that “should never have hap­pened.”

He ac­cepted re­spon­si­bil­ity for his ac­tions and felt gen­uine em­pa­thy for the vic­tims.

“His fam­ily are stand­ing by him. He’s seen the er­ror of his ways and is mov­ing on.

“He’s also con­trite - and ter­ri­fied at the prospect of im­pris­on­ment.”

The lawyer urged the sher­iff to con­sider a non-cus­to­dial dis­posal.

Sher­iff Foulis con­ceded that the num­ber of im­ages in­volved wasn’t the “high­est” but a “sig­nif­i­cant num­ber” were of the high­est cat­e­gori­sa­tion.

“I con­sider that cus­tody is the only dis­posal.”

He or­dered the stash of vile ma­te­rial to be for­feited but re­fused a Crown mo­tion to im­pose a Sex­ual Of­fences Pre­ven­tion Or­der, de­signed to pro­tect the pub­lic from se­ri­ous harm, against the ac­cused.

Sen­tence

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.