Darren Manders from Shipston Escapes Jail After Downloading Revolting Child Abuse Images
| Red Rose Database
Shipston Child Sexual Abuser
In April 2013, a man from Shipston, identified as Darren Manders, narrowly avoided imprisonment after being found in possession of highly disturbing and explicit images depicting the sexual abuse of young children. Manders, who was described as a loner with no employment and limited social connections, had downloaded and stored these images on his computer, which led to serious legal consequences.
According to court proceedings at Warwick Crown Court, Manders, aged 28 and residing on Greenway Road, pleaded guilty to six charges of making indecent images of children. These charges stemmed from the discovery of the images on his devices, which included both still photographs and videos. The police investigation was initiated after authorities received information regarding Manders’s internet activity in June of the previous year.
During the search, officers seized multiple electronic devices, including a laptop from Manders’s bedroom. An examination of the computer revealed a total of 134 indecent images, some of which were classified as hardcore material. The images depicted extremely young girls, some as young as two years old, being subjected to sexual abuse by adults. The graphic nature of these images was described as 'chillingly revolting' by the judge presiding over the case.
In his police interview, Manders portrayed himself as a socially isolated individual with no real friends or employment. He admitted to creating a false online identity, posing as a nine-year-old girl named 'Mary,' using a picture of a young girl in swimwear that he had downloaded. Through this fake persona, he received messages from men asking if 'Mary' would like them to perform the acts shown in the images. Despite this, Manders claimed he was not a paedophile and insisted that he did not derive sexual gratification from the images he had stored.
Prosecutor Glyn Samuel highlighted that Manders’s actions involved not only possession but also the creation of a false identity to engage with others online. The court was told that Manders’s motivation for collecting the images was related to his own sexual inadequacy and social difficulties, which he initially denied but later admitted after an adjournment.
Defense lawyer Nick Devine acknowledged Manders’s social and sexual inexperience, describing him as someone who was 'plainly socially and sexually inadequate.' He requested that the court consider a community-based sentence combined with an intensive program aimed at addressing Manders’s issues.
Judge Alan Parker, in delivering his verdict, emphasized the severity of Manders’s actions. He stated, “You acquired and stored the various images which have been described to me, and just those that were described were chillingly revolting. You stored them for viewing from time to time for sexual gratification, and it has taken until today for you to confess to that.”
However, the judge also acknowledged Manders’s honesty in admitting his motivation, which influenced the decision to avoid a custodial sentence. Instead, Manders was sentenced to a community order with three years of supervision, and he was mandated to participate in a three-year sex offenders group work program. Additionally, he was ordered to register as a sex offender for five years, comply with a sexual offences prevention order restricting his contact with children and his computer use, and pay costs amounting to £340. This case highlights the ongoing concerns surrounding online child exploitation and the importance of judicial discretion in handling such sensitive cases.
According to court proceedings at Warwick Crown Court, Manders, aged 28 and residing on Greenway Road, pleaded guilty to six charges of making indecent images of children. These charges stemmed from the discovery of the images on his devices, which included both still photographs and videos. The police investigation was initiated after authorities received information regarding Manders’s internet activity in June of the previous year.
During the search, officers seized multiple electronic devices, including a laptop from Manders’s bedroom. An examination of the computer revealed a total of 134 indecent images, some of which were classified as hardcore material. The images depicted extremely young girls, some as young as two years old, being subjected to sexual abuse by adults. The graphic nature of these images was described as 'chillingly revolting' by the judge presiding over the case.
In his police interview, Manders portrayed himself as a socially isolated individual with no real friends or employment. He admitted to creating a false online identity, posing as a nine-year-old girl named 'Mary,' using a picture of a young girl in swimwear that he had downloaded. Through this fake persona, he received messages from men asking if 'Mary' would like them to perform the acts shown in the images. Despite this, Manders claimed he was not a paedophile and insisted that he did not derive sexual gratification from the images he had stored.
Prosecutor Glyn Samuel highlighted that Manders’s actions involved not only possession but also the creation of a false identity to engage with others online. The court was told that Manders’s motivation for collecting the images was related to his own sexual inadequacy and social difficulties, which he initially denied but later admitted after an adjournment.
Defense lawyer Nick Devine acknowledged Manders’s social and sexual inexperience, describing him as someone who was 'plainly socially and sexually inadequate.' He requested that the court consider a community-based sentence combined with an intensive program aimed at addressing Manders’s issues.
Judge Alan Parker, in delivering his verdict, emphasized the severity of Manders’s actions. He stated, “You acquired and stored the various images which have been described to me, and just those that were described were chillingly revolting. You stored them for viewing from time to time for sexual gratification, and it has taken until today for you to confess to that.”
However, the judge also acknowledged Manders’s honesty in admitting his motivation, which influenced the decision to avoid a custodial sentence. Instead, Manders was sentenced to a community order with three years of supervision, and he was mandated to participate in a three-year sex offenders group work program. Additionally, he was ordered to register as a sex offender for five years, comply with a sexual offences prevention order restricting his contact with children and his computer use, and pay costs amounting to £340. This case highlights the ongoing concerns surrounding online child exploitation and the importance of judicial discretion in handling such sensitive cases.