BRIAN GOLDINGAY FROM INKBERROW AND SAINTBRIDGE CAUGHT WITH CHILD ABUSE IMAGES

In a case that has raised serious concerns about individuals involved in the possession of indecent images of children, Brian Goldingay, a 37-year-old man from Saintbridge, was brought before Gloucester Crown Court to face multiple charges related to child exploitation material. The incident came to light when police seized Goldingay's mobile device, revealing that he had downloaded and stored over 300 indecent images of children, a discovery that prompted a detailed investigation into his activities.

Goldingay, who now resides near a primary school in Inkberrow, pleaded guilty to six counts of possessing indecent images of children. During the court proceedings, he claimed that his sole purpose for acquiring these images was to taunt other online users, specifically paedophiles, in an effort to challenge their interests. He insisted that he was personally disgusted by the images and did not derive any sexual gratification from them.

The court heard that the police had initially recovered Goldingay's Blackberry mobile phone in March of the previous year. Prosecutor Lisa Hennessy explained that Goldingay had told officers he used his mother’s laptop to view the images and then took photographs of the screen to transfer the files onto his phone. However, investigators found no evidence of the images on the laptop itself. Instead, the files appeared to have been created directly on a Blackberry device, which matched the make of Goldingay’s mobile phone.

During the hearing, Goldingay’s defense lawyer, Sabia Pathan, highlighted the unusual nature of the case. She emphasized that her client claimed he did not seek sexual gratification from the images but instead used them as a form of protest or to confront others in online chatrooms who expressed interest in such material. This explanation was met with skepticism by the presiding judge, William Hart, who described the claim as “incredible.”

Judge Hart sentenced Goldingay to a 16-week jail term, which was suspended for 15 months, meaning he would not serve time unless he committed further offenses within that period. Additionally, he was ordered to complete 100 hours of unpaid community work. The court also imposed a sexual offences prevention order, disqualified him from working with children, and mandated that he register as a sex offender for the next seven years. The judge’s decision reflects the serious nature of the charges and the potential risk posed by individuals involved in such activities, regardless of their claimed intentions.