CLARE DINSDALE FROM WILLINGTON JAILED OVER CHILD SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CASE IN COUNTY DURHAM
| Red Rose Database
Willington Child Sexual Abuser
In a case that has shocked the community of Willington, County Durham, Clare Dinsdale, aged 40, has been sentenced to two years in prison following her involvement in a disturbing online relationship with a minor. The incident, which came to light in October 2016, involved Dinsdale exchanging explicit images and sexually charged messages with a teenage boy, an act she later admitted to and pleaded guilty to in Teesside Crown Court.
According to court records, Dinsdale, a mother of the boy, initially met him a few years prior and they maintained contact through Facebook. The relationship took a sinister turn when concerns were raised by the boy’s father, prompting authorities to intervene. A 'harbouring notice' was issued last year, explicitly forbidding Dinsdale from making any contact with the minor. Despite this legal restriction, she continued to communicate with the boy, exchanging messages that were described as 'sexually charged' and sharing explicit photographs.
The prosecution revealed that police found Dinsdale at her residence on three separate occasions while attempting to locate the boy. The messages exchanged included explicit language, with the boy expressing a desire for sexual activity and Dinsdale responding affirmatively. One message from the boy read, “I want a sh*g when I come round,” to which Dinsdale replied simply, “yes.” The court noted that Dinsdale did not discourage these advances, indicating her active participation in the inappropriate communication.
Despite the seriousness of the allegations, the prosecution acknowledged that they could not prove that any sexual activity had actually taken place, as the victim refused to provide a statement. Nonetheless, Dinsdale’s actions, including the continued messaging and sharing of explicit images, were deemed highly concerning. The court also heard that Dinsdale was remanded in custody in April after breaching her bail conditions, which mandated she stay away from her young victim.
Jo Kidd, representing the prosecution, emphasized the disturbing nature of the case, stating, “The messages indicated [the boy] repeatedly asking for sexual activity. Her responses indicate that it would be the order of the day.” Judge Phillips, presiding over the case, remarked on the defendant’s lack of restraint, stating, “There was no discouragement whatsoever from the defendant.”
A victim impact statement from the boy’s father expressed deep concern, noting that his son’s behaviour has significantly deteriorated as a result of the contact with Dinsdale. The court also considered the fact that two additional charges—causing a child to watch a sexual act and meeting a child following sexual grooming—were dropped by the prosecution.
Judge Phillips delivered a stern warning to Dinsdale, stating, “It is not realistic to say that sexual activity was not something you thought about. The most concerning feature of this case is the boy’s age. You had more than two months of sexual communication despite knowing his age. You have taken advantage of his vulnerability and done so in a persistent manner. The totality of the effect is that it has had a very negative impact on him and his family.”
As Dinsdale prepares for her release later this month, the community remains vigilant about the implications of this case, which highlights the dangers of online grooming and the importance of safeguarding vulnerable minors from exploitation.
According to court records, Dinsdale, a mother of the boy, initially met him a few years prior and they maintained contact through Facebook. The relationship took a sinister turn when concerns were raised by the boy’s father, prompting authorities to intervene. A 'harbouring notice' was issued last year, explicitly forbidding Dinsdale from making any contact with the minor. Despite this legal restriction, she continued to communicate with the boy, exchanging messages that were described as 'sexually charged' and sharing explicit photographs.
The prosecution revealed that police found Dinsdale at her residence on three separate occasions while attempting to locate the boy. The messages exchanged included explicit language, with the boy expressing a desire for sexual activity and Dinsdale responding affirmatively. One message from the boy read, “I want a sh*g when I come round,” to which Dinsdale replied simply, “yes.” The court noted that Dinsdale did not discourage these advances, indicating her active participation in the inappropriate communication.
Despite the seriousness of the allegations, the prosecution acknowledged that they could not prove that any sexual activity had actually taken place, as the victim refused to provide a statement. Nonetheless, Dinsdale’s actions, including the continued messaging and sharing of explicit images, were deemed highly concerning. The court also heard that Dinsdale was remanded in custody in April after breaching her bail conditions, which mandated she stay away from her young victim.
Jo Kidd, representing the prosecution, emphasized the disturbing nature of the case, stating, “The messages indicated [the boy] repeatedly asking for sexual activity. Her responses indicate that it would be the order of the day.” Judge Phillips, presiding over the case, remarked on the defendant’s lack of restraint, stating, “There was no discouragement whatsoever from the defendant.”
A victim impact statement from the boy’s father expressed deep concern, noting that his son’s behaviour has significantly deteriorated as a result of the contact with Dinsdale. The court also considered the fact that two additional charges—causing a child to watch a sexual act and meeting a child following sexual grooming—were dropped by the prosecution.
Judge Phillips delivered a stern warning to Dinsdale, stating, “It is not realistic to say that sexual activity was not something you thought about. The most concerning feature of this case is the boy’s age. You had more than two months of sexual communication despite knowing his age. You have taken advantage of his vulnerability and done so in a persistent manner. The totality of the effect is that it has had a very negative impact on him and his family.”
As Dinsdale prepares for her release later this month, the community remains vigilant about the implications of this case, which highlights the dangers of online grooming and the importance of safeguarding vulnerable minors from exploitation.