ANDREW COBLEY FROM BLACK DAM SENTENCED FOR CHILD AND ANIMAL PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES IN BASINGSTOKE
| Red Rose Database
Black Dam Child Sexual Abuser
In January 2021, a man from Black Dam, named Andrew Cobley, faced legal proceedings in connection with the possession of highly disturbing and illegal images involving children and animals. The court heard that Cobley, aged 21 and currently unemployed, resides on Gainsborough Road in Black Dam. Despite his employment status, he acts as an 'unofficial carer' for his mother, a role that adds a complex layer to his case.
During a court hearing at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court, it was revealed that Cobley had been found in possession of a range of illicit images on his electronic devices. These included extreme pornographic images depicting sexual acts involving animals, which are classified as particularly heinous. Additionally, authorities discovered two images classified as Class A child abuse images and 21 images categorized as Class C, all of which were obtained and stored between December 23, 2018, and October 11, 2019.
Prosecutor Mr. Fossler stated during the hearing that Cobley had acknowledged that his curiosity had led him to view these disturbing images. The court was informed that the authorities intended to seek a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) against Cobley, which would enable ongoing monitoring of his online activity. This order is designed to restrict and oversee his internet usage to prevent further offenses.
Furthermore, the prosecution requested that the hard drive and a Samsung mobile phone belonging to Cobley be destroyed, aiming to prevent any further access to the illegal material. The court considered these requests as part of the sentencing process.
When it came to sentencing, District Judge Tim Pattinson acknowledged Cobley's guilty pleas to multiple charges, including two counts of making indecent photographs of a child, possession of a prohibited image of a child, and possession of extreme pornographic images. The judge emphasized that Cobley would receive full credit for his cooperation and guilty pleas. Notably, the judge decided not to impose a punitive sentence, taking into account Cobley's role as a carer and his characterization as a person of 'good character.'
Instead, Cobley was sentenced to a community order for three years. This order requires him to attend an accredited sex offenders’ treatment program and participate in up to 15 days of rehabilitation activities. The court also formally implemented the five-year SHPO, which mandates that Cobley only use devices that allow authorities to review his browsing history. He is prohibited from deleting or disposing of any viewed content, and police are authorized to search all his devices upon request.
Additionally, Cobley will be registered on the sex offenders’ register for five years. He is also ordered to pay costs and charges totaling £170, which will be deducted from his benefits. District Judge Pattinson warned Cobley that these charges could have resulted in a prison sentence, emphasizing the seriousness of the offenses. He stated, 'Possession of Class A images can and often does lead to a prison sentence.' However, he highlighted that, in this case, a community order was deemed appropriate, provided that Cobley fully complies with the terms of the SHPO. The judge concluded by stressing the importance of strict adherence to the order, warning that failure to do so could lead to very serious consequences.
During a court hearing at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court, it was revealed that Cobley had been found in possession of a range of illicit images on his electronic devices. These included extreme pornographic images depicting sexual acts involving animals, which are classified as particularly heinous. Additionally, authorities discovered two images classified as Class A child abuse images and 21 images categorized as Class C, all of which were obtained and stored between December 23, 2018, and October 11, 2019.
Prosecutor Mr. Fossler stated during the hearing that Cobley had acknowledged that his curiosity had led him to view these disturbing images. The court was informed that the authorities intended to seek a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) against Cobley, which would enable ongoing monitoring of his online activity. This order is designed to restrict and oversee his internet usage to prevent further offenses.
Furthermore, the prosecution requested that the hard drive and a Samsung mobile phone belonging to Cobley be destroyed, aiming to prevent any further access to the illegal material. The court considered these requests as part of the sentencing process.
When it came to sentencing, District Judge Tim Pattinson acknowledged Cobley's guilty pleas to multiple charges, including two counts of making indecent photographs of a child, possession of a prohibited image of a child, and possession of extreme pornographic images. The judge emphasized that Cobley would receive full credit for his cooperation and guilty pleas. Notably, the judge decided not to impose a punitive sentence, taking into account Cobley's role as a carer and his characterization as a person of 'good character.'
Instead, Cobley was sentenced to a community order for three years. This order requires him to attend an accredited sex offenders’ treatment program and participate in up to 15 days of rehabilitation activities. The court also formally implemented the five-year SHPO, which mandates that Cobley only use devices that allow authorities to review his browsing history. He is prohibited from deleting or disposing of any viewed content, and police are authorized to search all his devices upon request.
Additionally, Cobley will be registered on the sex offenders’ register for five years. He is also ordered to pay costs and charges totaling £170, which will be deducted from his benefits. District Judge Pattinson warned Cobley that these charges could have resulted in a prison sentence, emphasizing the seriousness of the offenses. He stated, 'Possession of Class A images can and often does lead to a prison sentence.' However, he highlighted that, in this case, a community order was deemed appropriate, provided that Cobley fully complies with the terms of the SHPO. The judge concluded by stressing the importance of strict adherence to the order, warning that failure to do so could lead to very serious consequences.