CHELTENHAM SCHOOL WORKER CAMERON HAWKINS ESCAPES JAIL AFTER INDECENT IMAGE CASE

In September 2016, a troubling case emerged involving a 24-year-old man from Cheltenham named Cameron Hawkins, who found himself at the center of a serious legal proceeding related to child exploitation and indecent material. Hawkins, who was employed at a secondary school in Cheltenham alongside his father, who is a caretaker, faced charges after authorities discovered an indecent image of a child on his computer. Despite the gravity of the possession charge, Hawkins was ultimately given a conditional discharge by the court, a decision that drew both relief and controversy.

During the proceedings, Hawkins admitted to possessing the indecent image, which was found on his computer last May. However, he was cleared by a jury of attempting to incite a six-year-old boy to show him his bottom. The incident allegedly took place at the school during a summer camp in August of the previous year. It was reported that Hawkins approached two young boys, aged five and six, in the school’s toilets. Witnesses claimed that he engaged the older boy in a game of stone, paper, scissors, and then made a disturbing comment, suggesting that if he won, he would 'check his bottom.'

Hawkins denied making any such comment about the boy’s bottom and insisted that he had no interest in children’s behinds. He also admitted to conducting internet searches related to 'child mooning' and similar topics, which raised concerns during the investigation. The court heard that Hawkins’s actions and online searches were indicative of troubling behavior, but he maintained his innocence regarding the specific incident involving the children.

Judge Recorder Jane Rowley, after reviewing reports on Hawkins’s character and circumstances, decided to impose a conditional discharge rather than a custodial sentence. She cited Hawkins’s condition, which includes Asperger’s Syndrome, his previously unblemished character, and the strong support he receives from his responsible parents as reasons for her decision. The judge’s ruling reflects a nuanced approach, balancing the seriousness of the charges with Hawkins’s personal circumstances and the level of support he has from his family. The case remains a stark reminder of the complexities involved in handling cases of this nature, especially when mental health considerations are involved.