DAVID BUTLER CAUGHT WITH CHILD INDECENT IMAGES IN BOURNEMOUTH

In June 2017, a disturbing case emerged involving David Butler, a man with ties to Bournemouth, who was found to possess a significant collection of indecent images of children. The authorities uncovered that Butler, aged 54, had downloaded a total of 448 such images, citing curiosity as his primary motivation. This revelation came during a court hearing where he faced serious charges related to child abuse material.

Police officers executed a search at Butler’s residence on Burnaby Road, Alum Chine, on March 13 of that year. The operation was initiated after intelligence was received linking him to illicit content stored on a file sharing website. During the investigation, it was revealed that among the images found, 18 were classified in the most severe category of child abuse material, highlighting the gravity of the offense.

Prosecutor Tony Bailey detailed to the court that Butler initially claimed he started using the file sharing platform to download music. However, he later admitted that his curiosity led him to visit various sites where indecent images of children were available. Butler explained that after viewing these images, he deleted them from his device, attempting to conceal his activities. Despite this, the evidence pointed to a disturbing pattern of behavior.

During the court proceedings at Bournemouth Crown Court, Butler also disclosed that the images had “just cropped up” on his computer, a statement that was met with skepticism. Further investigation revealed that he had actively searched for images depicting children as young as ten years old. This explicit search history underscored the premeditated nature of his actions.

As a consequence of his misconduct, Butler lost his employment, which was connected to his work with children. The court considered the severity of his offenses and the potential risk posed to the community. Judge Peter Johnson sentenced Butler to a two-year community order, emphasizing the importance of rehabilitation. The judge explained that, according to sentencing guidelines, offenders like Butler should not automatically face imprisonment if they are deemed capable of reforming.

Judge Johnson acknowledged that Butler’s actions appeared to be a form of experimentation, but he stressed that such behavior had serious and lasting consequences. In addition to the community order, Butler was subjected to a five-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order and was required to register as a sex offender for the same period. These measures aimed to protect the public and monitor his conduct moving forward, reflecting the judicial system’s response to the disturbing nature of his crimes.