GEORGE BROWN FROM HOWDEN CAUGHT WITH OVER 1,500 CHILD ABUSE IMAGES IN SHOCKING CASE
| Red Rose Database
Howden Child Sexual Abuser
In a disturbing case that has sent shockwaves through the community of Howden, Geoffrey Brown, aged 64, was found to possess an extensive collection of indecent images of children, including over 1,500 videos and numerous photographs depicting abuse. The incident came to light after authorities from the Internet and Sex Offender Unit conducted a raid on his residence on June 7, 2018, following a credible tip-off that prompted a thorough investigation.
During the police operation at Brown’s home, officers discovered a significant amount of illicit material stored across multiple devices, including his laptop, personal computer, and USB stick. Brown initially denied any involvement, protesting his innocence, but eventually confessed to the officers that they would find indecent images of children on his devices. He admitted that the devices belonged solely to him and that they were purchased new, emphasizing that no one else had access to them.
Authorities uncovered a disturbing collection of videos and images, with the content categorized into different levels of severity. The most serious category, Category A, contained 558 videos, while Category B had 1,091 videos, and Category C held 162 videos. Additionally, two videos were classified as prohibited. The photographic evidence was equally troubling, with three images in Category A, three in Category B, and 56 in Category C, along with eight prohibited pictures. The sheer volume and nature of the material highlighted the gravity of the offense.
Prosecutor Stephen Welsh outlined during the sentencing hearing that Brown claimed to have first encountered these indecent images four years prior, stating that he had downloaded them accidentally while attempting to download a film. Welsh emphasized that Brown took responsibility for the devices, asserting that they were his and that he was the sole user. When questioned about searching for such material, Brown denied it, although the Crown did not accept this denial. Welsh also noted that Brown claimed he was not aware of being attracted to children, responding with “not that I know of,” when asked about his sexual interests. Furthermore, Brown was questioned about the distribution of the images across multiple devices, to which he responded, “I honestly don’t know.”
During police interviews, Brown denied having any sexual interest in children but admitted to engaging in “fantasy chat” where he posed as a nine-year-old boy, conversations that could have led to actual sexual abuse. The court was also informed that Brown used software designed to erase his browsing history, indicating an attempt to conceal his activities.
Given Brown’s previous good character, his age, and mental health issues, the judge, Recorder Ben Nolan QC, decided to suspend the prison sentence. The judge acknowledged Brown’s full and early admissions and his need for social support, noting that he planned to move in with his son in the Leeds/Bradford area for companionship.
Addressing Brown directly in court, Recorder Nolan stated, “You are a man of previous good character, but you have admitted possessing a large number of indecent images of children, of still and moving images. These are not victimless crimes; the children depicted are victims who are cruelly exploited and often made to re-enact abuse repeatedly.” The judge emphasized that despite Brown’s good character, the severity of the offense warranted a serious response.
As a result, Brown was sentenced to 18 months in prison, suspended for two years. He was also ordered to complete 50 hours of rehabilitation and was subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO). Additionally, he was required to register as a sex offender for ten years, ensuring ongoing monitoring of his activities and compliance with legal restrictions.
During the police operation at Brown’s home, officers discovered a significant amount of illicit material stored across multiple devices, including his laptop, personal computer, and USB stick. Brown initially denied any involvement, protesting his innocence, but eventually confessed to the officers that they would find indecent images of children on his devices. He admitted that the devices belonged solely to him and that they were purchased new, emphasizing that no one else had access to them.
Authorities uncovered a disturbing collection of videos and images, with the content categorized into different levels of severity. The most serious category, Category A, contained 558 videos, while Category B had 1,091 videos, and Category C held 162 videos. Additionally, two videos were classified as prohibited. The photographic evidence was equally troubling, with three images in Category A, three in Category B, and 56 in Category C, along with eight prohibited pictures. The sheer volume and nature of the material highlighted the gravity of the offense.
Prosecutor Stephen Welsh outlined during the sentencing hearing that Brown claimed to have first encountered these indecent images four years prior, stating that he had downloaded them accidentally while attempting to download a film. Welsh emphasized that Brown took responsibility for the devices, asserting that they were his and that he was the sole user. When questioned about searching for such material, Brown denied it, although the Crown did not accept this denial. Welsh also noted that Brown claimed he was not aware of being attracted to children, responding with “not that I know of,” when asked about his sexual interests. Furthermore, Brown was questioned about the distribution of the images across multiple devices, to which he responded, “I honestly don’t know.”
During police interviews, Brown denied having any sexual interest in children but admitted to engaging in “fantasy chat” where he posed as a nine-year-old boy, conversations that could have led to actual sexual abuse. The court was also informed that Brown used software designed to erase his browsing history, indicating an attempt to conceal his activities.
Given Brown’s previous good character, his age, and mental health issues, the judge, Recorder Ben Nolan QC, decided to suspend the prison sentence. The judge acknowledged Brown’s full and early admissions and his need for social support, noting that he planned to move in with his son in the Leeds/Bradford area for companionship.
Addressing Brown directly in court, Recorder Nolan stated, “You are a man of previous good character, but you have admitted possessing a large number of indecent images of children, of still and moving images. These are not victimless crimes; the children depicted are victims who are cruelly exploited and often made to re-enact abuse repeatedly.” The judge emphasized that despite Brown’s good character, the severity of the offense warranted a serious response.
As a result, Brown was sentenced to 18 months in prison, suspended for two years. He was also ordered to complete 50 hours of rehabilitation and was subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO). Additionally, he was required to register as a sex offender for ten years, ensuring ongoing monitoring of his activities and compliance with legal restrictions.