GLYN COURT FROM GUISBOROUGH ESCAPES JAIL AFTER CHILD ABUSE IMAGE SCANDAL IN MIDDLESBROUGH
| Red Rose Database
Guisborough Child Sexual Abuser
In a case that has shocked the local community of Guisborough and the wider Middlesbrough area, Glyn Court, a 54-year-old council worker, appeared in court facing serious allegations related to the possession of indecent images of children. The incident came to light after Cleveland Police, acting on information provided by the National Crime Agency, conducted a search of his residence in Guisborough.
During the investigation, authorities seized two laptops and a memory stick belonging to Court, revealing a disturbing collection of digital material. The police found a total of 229 indecent photographs of children, which varied in severity. Many of these images were duplicates, but the collection also included eight prohibited cartoon images depicting children, which are classified as illegal under current laws. Additionally, the police uncovered 38 images categorized as extreme pornography, described as grossly offensive, disgusting, or obscene.
In his initial police interview, Court denied any deliberate interest in seeking out or downloading such material. He claimed that he might have inadvertently come across inappropriate images but insisted he deleted them immediately upon discovery. However, during a subsequent interview, he admitted to having downloaded the images, acknowledging his involvement.
Glyn Court faced multiple charges, including three counts of making indecent photographs of children, two counts of possessing extreme pornographic images, and one count of possessing prohibited images of children. The offences spanned a period from August 2006 until the police executed the search at his Guisborough home in April 2014.
Throughout the proceedings, Court’s defense lawyer, John Nixon, described his client as a “chastened individual,” emphasizing the personal struggles Court had faced. Nixon explained that Court had experienced difficulties with alcohol and had suffered family bereavements, which reportedly led to increased internet use during vulnerable times. Despite these issues, Nixon stressed that Court was not an obsessive user of such material, noting that he still enjoyed sports, exercise, and social activities.
He further argued that the collection of images was relatively small, especially when compared to cases involving tens of thousands of such images. Nixon highlighted Court’s long-standing career in local government since 1989, portraying him as a diligent and conscientious employee. He expressed uncertainty about the future of Court’s employment, suggesting that his job might be at risk but emphasizing that Court’s behavior was not typical of his character.
Judge Tony Briggs addressed the court, acknowledging that the number of images involved was not as high as in some other cases but emphasizing the serious nature of the activity. The judge remarked that such activity fuels demand for the creation of more indecent images of children, which is inherently harmful. While he considered the possibility that Court might not reoffend, he also noted the potential risk of a repeat offense, given the circumstances.
In light of these considerations, the judge decided not to impose immediate custody. Instead, Glyn Court was sentenced to a six-month jail term, suspended for two years. The court also ordered him to participate in a sex offender treatment program and complete 30 days of rehabilitation activities. Additionally, Court will be required to register as a sex offender for a period of seven years, reflecting the gravity of his actions and the need for ongoing monitoring.
During the investigation, authorities seized two laptops and a memory stick belonging to Court, revealing a disturbing collection of digital material. The police found a total of 229 indecent photographs of children, which varied in severity. Many of these images were duplicates, but the collection also included eight prohibited cartoon images depicting children, which are classified as illegal under current laws. Additionally, the police uncovered 38 images categorized as extreme pornography, described as grossly offensive, disgusting, or obscene.
In his initial police interview, Court denied any deliberate interest in seeking out or downloading such material. He claimed that he might have inadvertently come across inappropriate images but insisted he deleted them immediately upon discovery. However, during a subsequent interview, he admitted to having downloaded the images, acknowledging his involvement.
Glyn Court faced multiple charges, including three counts of making indecent photographs of children, two counts of possessing extreme pornographic images, and one count of possessing prohibited images of children. The offences spanned a period from August 2006 until the police executed the search at his Guisborough home in April 2014.
Throughout the proceedings, Court’s defense lawyer, John Nixon, described his client as a “chastened individual,” emphasizing the personal struggles Court had faced. Nixon explained that Court had experienced difficulties with alcohol and had suffered family bereavements, which reportedly led to increased internet use during vulnerable times. Despite these issues, Nixon stressed that Court was not an obsessive user of such material, noting that he still enjoyed sports, exercise, and social activities.
He further argued that the collection of images was relatively small, especially when compared to cases involving tens of thousands of such images. Nixon highlighted Court’s long-standing career in local government since 1989, portraying him as a diligent and conscientious employee. He expressed uncertainty about the future of Court’s employment, suggesting that his job might be at risk but emphasizing that Court’s behavior was not typical of his character.
Judge Tony Briggs addressed the court, acknowledging that the number of images involved was not as high as in some other cases but emphasizing the serious nature of the activity. The judge remarked that such activity fuels demand for the creation of more indecent images of children, which is inherently harmful. While he considered the possibility that Court might not reoffend, he also noted the potential risk of a repeat offense, given the circumstances.
In light of these considerations, the judge decided not to impose immediate custody. Instead, Glyn Court was sentenced to a six-month jail term, suspended for two years. The court also ordered him to participate in a sex offender treatment program and complete 30 days of rehabilitation activities. Additionally, Court will be required to register as a sex offender for a period of seven years, reflecting the gravity of his actions and the need for ongoing monitoring.