JAMES LOADES AND SHOCKING SEX OFFENDER ACTS IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE AND DURHAM
A convicted sex offender, James Loades, traveled from Northamptonshire with the intention of meeting a teenager at Durham Railway Station, only to find himself caught in a police sting.Loades, aged 31, believed he was arranging to meet a 14-year-old girl with whom he had been communicating online in anticipation of a sexual encounter.
According to evidence presented in Durham Crown Court, Loades sent a message to what he thought was the girl, stating that he would visit her home for a kiss and cuddle and questioned whether she was a virgin.
Unbeknownst to Loades, the girl was not real.
He was engaging with a decoy profile, which had been set up by a woman impersonating the 14-year-old online.
As Loades waited at Durham Railway Station for the meeting, law enforcement officers, who had been monitoring his communications, intervened.
Police arrived at the scene and swiftly arrested him.
The court proceedings revealed that Loades’s plans to meet the girl occurred less than three weeks after he was released from prison, where he had served a 14-month sentence for attempted sexual communication with a minor.
Following his release, he was placed on licence on February 11 and was visited by a police public protection officer.
During this visit, Loades was handed a copy of the Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO), which explicitly prohibited him from contacting minors.
Despite the restrictions, Loades resumed online communication shortly after.
In a matter of days, he was chatting with what he believed to be two separate girls aged 14 and 13, as well as another girl who has not been identified or traced.
One of these, a girl named Lola, who accepted his friend request on February 25, was quickly flattered by Loades’s comments, which included remarks about her appearance and attire.
He propositioned her to meet in a hotel and even asked her to perform a sexual act on herself, instructing her to find a sex toy in her mother’s bedroom.
During these exchanges, he also sent explicit images.
By the time of Loades’s arrest, there was no evidence that he had made any real attempt to meet these girls in person.
The activities involved interactions with decoy profiles, including another online persona named Hannah Smith.
In each case, Loades was informed of the girls’ ages, to which he responded by asserting that he was 31 years old.
His conversations revealed disturbing attitudes, with one message indicating he believed some girls his age were engaging in sexual activities and inquiring about the girls’ underwear.
Loades, who resides in Kettering, Northamptonshire, pleaded guilty to multiple charges.
These included four breaches of the Sexual Harm Prevention Order, three counts of attempting to incite girls aged 13 to 15 to engage in sexual acts, one count of attempting to communicate sexually with a minor, and one count of attempting to meet a girl under 16 through grooming.
Defence solicitor Lewis Kerr pointed out that most of the attempted offences involved non-existent victims, emphasizing that they were attempts rather than actual encounters.
Nevertheless, Judge James Adkin made it clear that Loades’s intentions were plainly evident.
Addressing the court, the judge remarked, “It’s pretty obvious what his intention was being at Durham.
He’s done just about everything he could to commit them, by meeting with this girl, albeit, it wasn’t a child.” The pre-sentence report from the Probation Service indicated serious concerns about Loades’s entrenched and persistent pattern of offending.
Judge Adkin emphasized the significant risk of further sexual offences, especially considering how soon after his release these activities took place.
He stated, “There is a real and significant risk of you committing further specified sexual offences.
You seem unable to resist the compelling urge to offend.” Consequently, Loades was sentenced to a prison term of five years and four months.
Additionally, he was placed under an extended licence period of three years, meaning he would be monitored further after his release.
As part of his ongoing obligations, he will remain registered as a sex offender and subject to lifelong restrictions imposed by the Sexual Harm Prevention Order.
