IAN MAIDEN SENTENCED IN TEESSIDE FOR SEXUAL OFFENCES INVOLVING UNDERAGE GIRL
A sex offender, Ian Maiden, 48, from Doncaster, exposed himself to a teenage girl and later claimed he was doing so due to erectile dysfunction.Maiden had groomed the girl and sent her sexual messages, although her identity remains protected by law.
Prosecutor Aisha Wadoodi detailed the incident at Teesside Crown Court, stating, “He had his trousers down around his knees and was playing with his genitals.” She also outlined the nature of the messages Maiden sent to the schoolgirl, including comments calling her beautiful, expressing jealousy when she mentioned other boys, and claiming she had the best backside he had ever seen and that he wouldn’t mind being pinned down by her.
The girl’s mother discovered these messages on her daughter’s phone, which included a photo of Maiden’s genitals.
She took screenshots and reported the incident to the police in December 2017.
During police interview, Maiden denied performing a sex act in front of the girl, explaining that he was touching his genitals because of erectile dysfunction and not for sexual reasons.
“He said he didn’t do it for sexual reasons, he did it because he was bored,” said Miss Wadoodi.
Maiden, who previously lived in Hartlepool and now resides on Blenheim Road, Doncaster, later admitted to engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child and making sexual communications with a child—his first conviction.
In mitigation, Stephen Constantine, defending, stated, “He is somewhat at a loss to explain why he behaved as he did.
There is grooming-type behaviour.
Clearly, you’re dealing with a man of good character, married with children himself.
There have been consequences as far as his family are concerned.
They are no longer a family because of Mr Maiden’s behaviour.
He’s obtained any help he could to reduce any risk of this ever happening again.
There is work that can be done, and he has expressed the willingness and desire to engage with it.” Constantine also mentioned the delay in proceedings, noting, “There had been a delay of more than two years in the case as Maiden was interviewed two days after the offence but not charged until two years later.” Judge Paul Watson QC addressed Maiden directly, saying, “You, and the victim’s family, have had to wait a considerable period of time—far too long—for this matter to be resolved.
You did all you could, and I take into account very much the delay in this case.” The court noted that sexual activity in the presence of a child can result in a maximum sentence of 10 years.
Based on sentencing guidelines, Maiden, currently unemployed, faced a likely jail term of four months, with a two-month actual imprisonment.
The judge remarked, “That clearly wouldn’t provide any time whatsoever for any sexual offender treatment programme of any sort.
You’d be released fairly soon from that sentence.
You are not considered a danger to the public.
It seems to me to be better for the public that you receive the benefit of a sex offender treatment programme.” Maiden was sentenced to a four-month jail term, suspended for two years, and ordered to complete 25 days of rehabilitation activity.
He was also issued a Sexual Harm Prevention Order prohibiting any unsupervised contact or communication with under-16s, regulating his internet and device use, and social media engagement, all for 10 years.
Additionally, he will be registered on the sex offenders’ register for the same period.
