JAMES KEELING FROM EASTINGTON ESCAPES JAIL AFTER CHILD ABUSE IMAGE SCANDAL
| Red Rose Database
Eastington Child Sexual Abuser
In a case that has shocked the small community of Eastington, James Keeling, a 59-year-old resident of Middle Street, narrowly avoided imprisonment after being found in possession of highly disturbing and illegal images related to child abuse and extreme pornography. The incident came to light during a police investigation that uncovered the extent of Keeling's online activities, leading to a court hearing at Gloucester Crown Court in January 2019.
According to court reports, authorities responded to a tip-off received through an online platform called 'Chatstep' on June 8 of the previous year. The police arrived at Keeling's residence and, upon conducting a search, discovered his laptop as the sole device containing illicit material. Keeling was quick to admit to the charges when questioned, which included two counts of creating indecent images of children, one count of possessing a prohibited image of a child, and an additional charge involving an extreme pornographic image depicting adults engaging in sexual acts with animals.
Examination of Keeling's laptop revealed a disturbing collection of images. Specifically, investigators found two Category B images and three Category C images of child abuse, alongside nine images classified as prohibited under the law, and 29 images of extreme pornography. Prosecutor Susan Cavender explained to Judge Michael Cullum that these offenses appeared to be opportunistic, facilitated by the ease of access provided by 'Chatstep.' She emphasized that the platform's previous lax procedures made it particularly accessible to individuals with weak moral judgment, leading to impulsive criminal behavior.
Judge Cullum noted that, unusually, no Category A images were present in Keeling's collection. While the number of images was significant, he pointed out that they were relatively fewer compared to similar cases. The judge expressed a belief that a custodial sentence was not appropriate in this instance, especially considering Keeling's cooperation and efforts to seek help. It was revealed that Keeling was actively engaged with the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, a charity dedicated to preventing child abuse, and was funding his participation himself.
Representing Keeling, solicitor Matthew Harbinson stated that his client was currently undertaking a rehabilitation course, which he found to be beneficial. The court was informed that Keeling had no prior criminal record, which influenced the judge's decision.
Ultimately, Judge Cullum sentenced Keeling to a 24-month community order, including 25 sessions of rehabilitation activities. The judge expressed deep disappointment and emphasized the gravity of possessing images of children for sexual gratification, reminding Keeling that each image represented a real victim. The court made it clear that such offenses are not victimless and that Keeling would be confronting the reality of his actions regularly during his rehabilitation.
Furthermore, Keeling was ordered to pay £200 in court costs, and he was prohibited from working with children in any capacity. He was also placed on the sex offender register for a period of five years, underscoring the seriousness of his offenses and the importance of monitoring his activities moving forward. The case serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing efforts by law enforcement and judicial authorities to combat online child exploitation and protect vulnerable victims from further harm.
According to court reports, authorities responded to a tip-off received through an online platform called 'Chatstep' on June 8 of the previous year. The police arrived at Keeling's residence and, upon conducting a search, discovered his laptop as the sole device containing illicit material. Keeling was quick to admit to the charges when questioned, which included two counts of creating indecent images of children, one count of possessing a prohibited image of a child, and an additional charge involving an extreme pornographic image depicting adults engaging in sexual acts with animals.
Examination of Keeling's laptop revealed a disturbing collection of images. Specifically, investigators found two Category B images and three Category C images of child abuse, alongside nine images classified as prohibited under the law, and 29 images of extreme pornography. Prosecutor Susan Cavender explained to Judge Michael Cullum that these offenses appeared to be opportunistic, facilitated by the ease of access provided by 'Chatstep.' She emphasized that the platform's previous lax procedures made it particularly accessible to individuals with weak moral judgment, leading to impulsive criminal behavior.
Judge Cullum noted that, unusually, no Category A images were present in Keeling's collection. While the number of images was significant, he pointed out that they were relatively fewer compared to similar cases. The judge expressed a belief that a custodial sentence was not appropriate in this instance, especially considering Keeling's cooperation and efforts to seek help. It was revealed that Keeling was actively engaged with the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, a charity dedicated to preventing child abuse, and was funding his participation himself.
Representing Keeling, solicitor Matthew Harbinson stated that his client was currently undertaking a rehabilitation course, which he found to be beneficial. The court was informed that Keeling had no prior criminal record, which influenced the judge's decision.
Ultimately, Judge Cullum sentenced Keeling to a 24-month community order, including 25 sessions of rehabilitation activities. The judge expressed deep disappointment and emphasized the gravity of possessing images of children for sexual gratification, reminding Keeling that each image represented a real victim. The court made it clear that such offenses are not victimless and that Keeling would be confronting the reality of his actions regularly during his rehabilitation.
Furthermore, Keeling was ordered to pay £200 in court costs, and he was prohibited from working with children in any capacity. He was also placed on the sex offender register for a period of five years, underscoring the seriousness of his offenses and the importance of monitoring his activities moving forward. The case serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing efforts by law enforcement and judicial authorities to combat online child exploitation and protect vulnerable victims from further harm.