DAVID FAIRFIELD FROM CHATHAM SENTENCED FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES
| Red Rose Database
Chatham Sexual Abuser
In a case that has shocked the community of Chatham, David Fairfield, a 72-year-old resident of Wayfield Road, was sentenced to six months in prison for his involvement in the possession and distribution of child pornography. The sentencing took place at Maidstone Crown Court, where the court heard detailed accounts of Fairfield’s criminal activities and the circumstances surrounding his case.
Fairfield’s legal representative argued that a short prison term would serve little purpose, suggesting instead that his client could benefit from community-based rehabilitation programs. The defense highlighted Fairfield’s age, health issues, and the fact that he could participate in intensive sex offender treatment under a three-year community rehabilitation order. Despite these arguments, the presiding judge, Recorder John McDonald, QC, decided that incarceration was necessary, emphasizing the severity of the crimes committed.
The court was informed that Fairfield, who is openly homosexual, had downloaded a total of 868 images of child pornography on his home computer during the months of May and June. He pleaded guilty to 18 charges related to the creation of indecent photographs of children, as well as one charge of possessing such material. Prosecutor Dominic Webber stated that Fairfield admitted to viewing the illicit content for his own gratification, which added to the gravity of the case.
Details of the images revealed that they ranged in severity, with 813 classified at the lowest level, 17 at level two, 19 at level three, 18 at level four, and a single image at the highest level, five. The court also noted that Fairfield had previously been fined £50 in 1991 for exposing himself to an undercover police officer in nearby woods, indicating a history of inappropriate behavior.
Fairfield’s defense attorney, Oliver Weech, explained that the majority of the images were at the lowest level of severity and that Fairfield was disabled due to spinal injuries, which limited his mobility and ability to drive. His contact with the outside world was primarily through the internet and newspapers. Weech emphasized Fairfield’s interests in gardening and dog breeding, and noted that he had been openly homosexual throughout his life with a long-term partner. The defense argued that Fairfield’s actions were out of character and that he had acted under circumstances that did not reflect his usual behavior.
Judge McDonald acknowledged Fairfield’s age, health issues, guilty pleas, and remorse, but underscored the seriousness of the offenses, particularly because the images involved real children, some as young as eight years old. The judge stressed that the criminal activity involved the exploitation of children in the production of these images, which made the crimes particularly heinous.
To prevent any further risk to the public, the court imposed additional restrictions on Fairfield. He was banned from using a computer for five years and disqualified from working with children, measures aimed at safeguarding the community from potential harm in the future.
Fairfield’s legal representative argued that a short prison term would serve little purpose, suggesting instead that his client could benefit from community-based rehabilitation programs. The defense highlighted Fairfield’s age, health issues, and the fact that he could participate in intensive sex offender treatment under a three-year community rehabilitation order. Despite these arguments, the presiding judge, Recorder John McDonald, QC, decided that incarceration was necessary, emphasizing the severity of the crimes committed.
The court was informed that Fairfield, who is openly homosexual, had downloaded a total of 868 images of child pornography on his home computer during the months of May and June. He pleaded guilty to 18 charges related to the creation of indecent photographs of children, as well as one charge of possessing such material. Prosecutor Dominic Webber stated that Fairfield admitted to viewing the illicit content for his own gratification, which added to the gravity of the case.
Details of the images revealed that they ranged in severity, with 813 classified at the lowest level, 17 at level two, 19 at level three, 18 at level four, and a single image at the highest level, five. The court also noted that Fairfield had previously been fined £50 in 1991 for exposing himself to an undercover police officer in nearby woods, indicating a history of inappropriate behavior.
Fairfield’s defense attorney, Oliver Weech, explained that the majority of the images were at the lowest level of severity and that Fairfield was disabled due to spinal injuries, which limited his mobility and ability to drive. His contact with the outside world was primarily through the internet and newspapers. Weech emphasized Fairfield’s interests in gardening and dog breeding, and noted that he had been openly homosexual throughout his life with a long-term partner. The defense argued that Fairfield’s actions were out of character and that he had acted under circumstances that did not reflect his usual behavior.
Judge McDonald acknowledged Fairfield’s age, health issues, guilty pleas, and remorse, but underscored the seriousness of the offenses, particularly because the images involved real children, some as young as eight years old. The judge stressed that the criminal activity involved the exploitation of children in the production of these images, which made the crimes particularly heinous.
To prevent any further risk to the public, the court imposed additional restrictions on Fairfield. He was banned from using a computer for five years and disqualified from working with children, measures aimed at safeguarding the community from potential harm in the future.