RUNCORN PAEDOPHILE HUNTER CARL ROBINSON EXPOSED AS SEX OFFENDER INVOLVED IN CHILD ABUSE IMAGES
| Red Rose Database
Runcorn Rapist
In a shocking revelation at Chester Crown Court, it was disclosed that Carl Robinson, a 32-year-old man from Runcorn who previously portrayed himself as a paedophile hunter, was in fact engaged in the possession and distribution of highly disturbing child sexual abuse images. The court heard that Robinson’s collection included photographs depicting the rape of girls as young as four years old, a revelation that has sent shockwaves through the community.
Robinson’s arrest took place early in the morning on June 14 of the previous year. Police officers executed a search warrant at his residence on Boston Avenue in Runcorn at approximately 6:50 am. During the search, authorities uncovered two laptops containing a horrifying array of indecent images. Prosecutor Mandy Nepal detailed that the devices held 15 Category A images, which are classified as the most severe, along with 60 Category B images and 267 Category C images, illustrating a disturbing spectrum of child exploitation.
Further investigations revealed that Robinson had utilized a dark web browser to access illicit material, including a Russian website known for hosting such content. It was also discovered that he employed “cleaning” software to conceal his online activities. His search history included terms that indicated a depraved sexual interest in pre-teen and young teen girls, underscoring the extent of his disturbing preferences.
During the court proceedings, Judge Patrick Thompson emphasized the importance of public awareness regarding Robinson’s actions. He requested a detailed account of two sample photographs to illustrate the severity of the material Robinson possessed. One image depicted a girl no older than four being raped, while another showed a girl aged between 10 and 12 dressed as a nurse, also being sexually assaulted.
Judge Thompson pointed out that the demand created by individuals like Robinson fuels the cycle of abuse, leading to real children being harmed. The court was also informed that Robinson had previously posed as a paedophile hunter, setting up two sting operations aimed at catching suspected abusers. These stings took place both at his home and at an Asda supermarket in Widnes, where he attempted to lure potential offenders.
In a bizarre twist, Robinson claimed after his arrest that he had sent an image of young girls he found on Google to someone else, asserting that he wanted to be caught. The judge remarked that Robinson’s actions and statements demonstrated a troubling pattern of behavior.
Considering the sentencing options, Judge Thompson explained that a custodial sentence of around six months would be insufficient, as Robinson would not qualify for rehabilitation programs and might be at risk of re-offending. To better protect the public, the court opted for a community-based sentence. Robinson was sentenced to a three-year community order, which includes a 35-day rehabilitation requirement. Additionally, he was issued a five-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order and was ordered to register as a sex offender for the same period. The judge likened this to a suspended sentence, warning that any further offending would result in immediate imprisonment.
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Thompson expressed his disgust at Robinson’s actions. He stated, “What on earth a 32-year-old man is doing viewing this sick material is just beyond me. I don’t accept you are a paedophile hunter, we’ve heard you say that. What you are is a paedophile, viewing material of very young children being raped. That child wouldn’t be being raped if it wasn’t for men like you so people can make money out of the abuse and exploitation of children. You should feel thoroughly ashamed. You deserve to go to prison, but it seems to me what’s going to save you is your early guilty plea and your acceptance you’ve got a problem.”
He concluded by emphasizing the importance of ongoing treatment, stating, “I’ve got to protect the public from men like you. Sending you to prison for a very short time probably won’t protect the public in the long term. What will protect them I hope is if you’re placed on the sexual offender treatment programme.” Robinson was also ordered to pay a victim surcharge as part of his sentence, marking a significant step in addressing the grave misconduct associated with his case.
Robinson’s arrest took place early in the morning on June 14 of the previous year. Police officers executed a search warrant at his residence on Boston Avenue in Runcorn at approximately 6:50 am. During the search, authorities uncovered two laptops containing a horrifying array of indecent images. Prosecutor Mandy Nepal detailed that the devices held 15 Category A images, which are classified as the most severe, along with 60 Category B images and 267 Category C images, illustrating a disturbing spectrum of child exploitation.
Further investigations revealed that Robinson had utilized a dark web browser to access illicit material, including a Russian website known for hosting such content. It was also discovered that he employed “cleaning” software to conceal his online activities. His search history included terms that indicated a depraved sexual interest in pre-teen and young teen girls, underscoring the extent of his disturbing preferences.
During the court proceedings, Judge Patrick Thompson emphasized the importance of public awareness regarding Robinson’s actions. He requested a detailed account of two sample photographs to illustrate the severity of the material Robinson possessed. One image depicted a girl no older than four being raped, while another showed a girl aged between 10 and 12 dressed as a nurse, also being sexually assaulted.
Judge Thompson pointed out that the demand created by individuals like Robinson fuels the cycle of abuse, leading to real children being harmed. The court was also informed that Robinson had previously posed as a paedophile hunter, setting up two sting operations aimed at catching suspected abusers. These stings took place both at his home and at an Asda supermarket in Widnes, where he attempted to lure potential offenders.
In a bizarre twist, Robinson claimed after his arrest that he had sent an image of young girls he found on Google to someone else, asserting that he wanted to be caught. The judge remarked that Robinson’s actions and statements demonstrated a troubling pattern of behavior.
Considering the sentencing options, Judge Thompson explained that a custodial sentence of around six months would be insufficient, as Robinson would not qualify for rehabilitation programs and might be at risk of re-offending. To better protect the public, the court opted for a community-based sentence. Robinson was sentenced to a three-year community order, which includes a 35-day rehabilitation requirement. Additionally, he was issued a five-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order and was ordered to register as a sex offender for the same period. The judge likened this to a suspended sentence, warning that any further offending would result in immediate imprisonment.
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Thompson expressed his disgust at Robinson’s actions. He stated, “What on earth a 32-year-old man is doing viewing this sick material is just beyond me. I don’t accept you are a paedophile hunter, we’ve heard you say that. What you are is a paedophile, viewing material of very young children being raped. That child wouldn’t be being raped if it wasn’t for men like you so people can make money out of the abuse and exploitation of children. You should feel thoroughly ashamed. You deserve to go to prison, but it seems to me what’s going to save you is your early guilty plea and your acceptance you’ve got a problem.”
He concluded by emphasizing the importance of ongoing treatment, stating, “I’ve got to protect the public from men like you. Sending you to prison for a very short time probably won’t protect the public in the long term. What will protect them I hope is if you’re placed on the sexual offender treatment programme.” Robinson was also ordered to pay a victim surcharge as part of his sentence, marking a significant step in addressing the grave misconduct associated with his case.