JAMES HOWARD NUNEATON SEX OFFENDER EXPOSES HIMSELF AT PINGLES AND TOWN CENTRE
In a series of disturbing incidents in Nuneaton, James Howard, a 72-year-old resident of Sheelin Crescent, has been found guilty of multiple sexual offences involving young girls in various public locations within the town.His actions have caused significant concern among the community and prompted legal action that underscores the seriousness of his repeated misconduct.
Howard's criminal behavior first came to light in September 2012, during the aftermath of the school summer holiday.
Two young girls were shopping in the sweet aisle at the Wilkinsons store in Nuneaton when they noticed Howard was following them.
Despite their attempts to change aisles, Howard persisted in trailing them.
Frightened, the girls left the store and sat on a nearby bench, only to observe Howard continuing to watch them from a distance.
When they re-entered the store, Howard followed again, and this time, he engaged in further inappropriate conduct by placing his hand down his shorts and exposing himself to the young girls.
The girls then left the store and went outside, but Howard continued to follow them, pushing his bicycle along the street for a short distance before disappearing into the crowd as they called the police for help.
Further incidents occurred in late October of the same year.
Two 11-year-old girls at the Nat West cash machine in Nuneaton town centre noticed Howard looking at them from a nearby bench.
He then unbuttoned his trousers, exposed himself, and touched himself inappropriately while smiling and licking his lips at the girls.
Shocked and frightened, the girls sought refuge in Sally’s hairdressers, where they reported the incident to staff.
Security personnel arrived, and the girls identified Howard, who then rode away on his bike before authorities could apprehend him.
Howard's disturbing pattern of behavior continued into November.
On the 18th, a 13-year-old girl and her friend visited the Pingles Leisure Centre for swimming.
After their swim, they went into the centre’s café, where Howard appeared with a woman.
During this visit, Howard exposed himself to the girl while her friend was in the toilets.
The police were called, and the girl was able to identify Howard, leading to his arrest.
The earlier victims also identified him, but Howard chose to answer ‘no comment’ during police questioning.
It was revealed during the court proceedings that Howard had a history of similar offences.
In 2004, he was given a three-year community order for exposing himself and performing sex acts in front of children.
Despite this, he continued to offend, including incidents in the changing rooms at Stratford Leisure Centre, where he committed further acts of indecency in front of children.
These repeated offences led to his being sentenced in August 2005 to an indeterminate prison sentence for the protection of the public, with a minimum term of nine months.
Howard served two years and eight months before being released.
During the sentencing hearing, the prosecution highlighted Howard’s long-standing pattern of offending and his failure to learn from previous convictions.
The defense acknowledged his high risk of reoffending and suggested that he could benefit from a sex offender treatment program, which might be completed within two years if a suspended sentence were granted.
However, Judge Alan Parker was unequivocal in his assessment.
Addressing Howard directly, the judge questioned his motives and understanding, noting that Howard admitted to being sexually attracted to girls aged between 11 and 13.
The judge expressed concern over Howard’s dismissive attitude towards the impact of his actions, citing his statement that the children’s complaints were motivated by their own late arrivals rather than any harm caused.
Judge Parker emphasized the gravity of Howard’s conduct, stating, “The question is, why do you do this?
You admitted you are sexually attracted to girls aged between 11 and 13.
When you were asked why you exposed yourself you said ‘they’re amused by it.’ You don’t believe your sexual conduct had any impact on those children; and you believed the children only made complaints about you because they had been late home, in order to get themselves out of trouble.
You said ‘In my mind it’s nice.
It gives me a nice warm feeling in my groin.’ It was all about you, all about what you wanted, and nothing at all of sensitivity about your victims and what they must have feared as you pursued them.” He concluded that Howard posed a significant risk of causing serious harm, describing his offences as deeply disturbing and highlighting the ongoing danger he represented to children in Nuneaton.
As a result, Howard was sentenced to two years in prison, with the court also ordering him to register as a sex offender and banning him from entering the Pingles Leisure Centre.
Additionally, he was prohibited from having any contact with children and was subjected to a court order that reflects the community’s need for protection from his predatory behavior.
In a related development in January 2014, Howard was formally banned from the Pingles Leisure Centre and ordered to register as a sex offender following his guilty plea to four charges of engaging in sexual activity in front of children at the facility.
The court heard that Howard had twice performed sex acts in front of 12-year-old girls in September 2012 and did the same in front of two 11-year-olds the following month.
He also pleaded guilty to deliberately exposing his genitals in November 2012 with the intent that someone should see him.
His defense team requested a psychiatric report and a report from the Lucy Faithful Foundation, a charity dedicated to preventing child sex abuse and working with offenders to address their behavior.
Judge Alan Parker agreed that the case warranted these additional assessments, emphasizing that the case “cries out” for such reports.
Howard was granted bail under strict conditions, including a ban from visiting the Pingles Leisure Centre and any contact with children, pending the completion of these evaluations.
The judge warned Howard that the possibility of immediate imprisonment remained, and the reports would determine the final sentencing decision.
