GARY SHANLEY FROM JARROW CAUGHT IN CHILD SEX OFFENCE PLOT IN PLYMOUTH

In June 2019, a disturbing case emerged involving Gary Shanley, a man from Jarrow, who engaged in highly inappropriate and predatory online behavior targeting what he believed was a 12-year-old girl. The incident unfolded as Shanley initiated a sexual conversation with a social media profile named Sophia, which was later revealed to be a police decoy designed to catch online predators.

Shanley, aged 46 at the time, actively sought out children on the internet, and his interactions with the decoy profile quickly turned into explicit and revolting exchanges. The police had set up the profile as part of their Child Online Exploitation Protection initiative, aiming to identify and apprehend individuals attempting to exploit minors online. The profile was created on social media platforms, and Shanley contacted it in February of the previous year.

The conversation soon moved to the Kik messaging platform, where Shanley’s conduct became increasingly disturbing. Prosecutor Rachel Masters told Newcastle Crown Court that Shanley’s chat with the decoy was characterized by a rapid shift to sexual content. He asked the supposed girl for explicit photographs, and when she expressed discomfort, he initially apologized but then continued to push for more explicit images. Over the following days, Shanley sent a photograph of himself and provided an email address, urging the girl to send pictures of herself.

Shanley’s messages grew more explicit, including graphic images of his genitals and references to sexual acts. He asked the girl if she had ever been with a man before and directed her to perform sexual acts on herself. Despite her repeated insistence that she was only 12, Shanley reassured her that it was okay and continued to encourage the conversation. He even suggested he might travel from his home in Jarrow to Plymouth, where the girl claimed to live, to meet her, provided she was naked and willing to kiss him.

When the girl indicated she no longer wished to continue the conversation, Shanley responded by saying he was going to kill himself. Nevertheless, he persisted in sending further explicit messages over the following days, making references to having sex and expressing preferences about condom use. The police intervened at the end of April last year, arresting Shanley at his residence.

Shanley, who has a criminal history including eight previous convictions—one for indecent exposure in 1996—was on a 16-month suspended sentence at the time of his arrest. His prior sentence was for threats to kill his former partner and battery. The police’s operation and subsequent investigation led to his conviction for attempting to cause a child to engage in sexual activity and to watch a sexual act.

During the court proceedings, Shanley displayed aggressive behavior when questioned by the Probation Service about his offenses, even having to be asked to leave the interview. He was subsequently sentenced to two years in prison, with a ten-year sexual harm prevention order imposed, requiring him to register as a sex offender for the same period.

Judge Julie Clemitson addressed Shanley directly, condemning his actions as utterly revolting and highlighting his lack of remorse. She noted that the rapid escalation of the conversation to sexual content, despite knowing the girl’s age, indicated a deliberate intent to seek such interactions. The judge also emphasized that Shanley’s behavior demonstrated he was not seeking an accidental or incidental encounter but was actively pursuing predatory behavior. The court classified him as a very high risk of future sexual offending, and due to his attitude, he was deemed unmanageable within the community.

In April 2019, Shanley had already been warned by the court that he could face imprisonment for attempting to commit child sex offenses. He appeared at Newcastle Crown Court, pleaded guilty to the charges, and was scheduled for sentencing on June 17, pending further reports. The judge at that time, Judge Edward Bindloss, granted him bail but warned that the case’s outcome remained uncertain, including the possibility of immediate custody. The court clarified that the ongoing reports and assessments would determine the final sentence, which could still be jail time.