DAVID ROBERTS FROM BRIGHTON AND NEWHAVEN JAILED FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CRIMES

In December 2006, a disturbing case unfolded involving David Roberts, a man with ties to both Brighton and Newhaven, who was sentenced to prison for possessing and downloading explicit images of children. Roberts, aged 48, was found to have stored over 600 images and videos depicting minors, including one particularly egregious image classified at the highest level of abuse. His actions came to light when authorities uncovered his illicit activities on a work computer during an investigation initiated by Brighton and Hove City Council.

Roberts, who previously worked as an IT technician and a photography teacher at a school in Brighton, was employed by the council at the time of his arrest. His personal history is intertwined with the local community, notably having met his wife when she was just 15 years old, during his tenure at the Brighton school. The relationship eventually ended following his arrest, which revealed a disturbing pattern of behavior.

On the day of his court appearance at Lewes Crown Court, Roberts pleaded guilty to 16 charges of possessing indecent images of children. The court was presided over by Judge Anthony Scott-Gall, who sentenced Roberts to 12 months in prison. The judge expressed his condemnation of Roberts' actions, stating, "You have an exceedingly unhealthy interest in young girls."

Roberts attempted to justify his behavior by claiming he suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder, suggesting that this mental health condition drove his compulsive collection of the images. As he was led away to serve his sentence, he shouted at the judge, asserting, "I think you have not understood anything about obsessive compulsive disorder and your sentencing today has been a complete farce."

The investigation was initiated after the council’s technical support team, responsible for monitoring staff computer activity, flagged suspicious behavior in June of the previous year. Police subsequently searched Roberts' residence in Newhaven, uncovering a significant collection of illegal material stored on CDs and in printed form. The majority of the images and videos involved children aged between six and 12, with some files depicting the children in sexualized contexts.

During the search, authorities also discovered two pairs of girls’ knickers, a bra, and hair accessories. Roberts admitted that he had been viewing these images at work, copying them onto discs, and taking them home. He claimed that one pair of knickers was found in a Brighton car park, while the other belonged to his wife. His wife, however, denied ownership of the pants but acknowledged that the bra might have belonged to her.

It was also revealed that Roberts had been involved in a relationship with his wife since she was a 15-year-old pupil, while he was 27. The couple eventually separated following his arrest. His defense attorney, Lewis Power, highlighted that Roberts had lost his wife, his job, his home, and his standing within the community since his arrest. He also noted that Roberts had been viewing child pornography since 1998 and had developed an obsessive fear of being labeled a pedophile in recent years.

Roberts' employment history includes 15 years working for the Brighton and Hove City Council, primarily as a photography teacher before earning a master's degree. His career was abruptly ended by his arrest, and he is now unemployed. As part of his sentence, Roberts was subjected to a sexual prevention order, which prohibits him from contacting children, working with minors, or owning devices capable of recording images. He is also barred from using the internet or possessing any images of children without parental consent. Additionally, he is forbidden from owning a digital camera or mobile phone capable of recording moving images and must inform police if he lives with or communicates with any children.

Roberts is required to register as a sex offender for ten years, ensuring ongoing monitoring of his activities and compliance with the restrictions imposed by the court.