JASON MUMFORD CAUGHT PEERING AT WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT READING LEISURE CENTRE

In June 2016, Jason Mumford, a man residing in Reading, was involved in a disturbing series of voyeuristic activities at the Loddon Valley Leisure Centre. The court heard that Mumford, aged 43 at the time, had developed a disturbing obsession with spying on women and young girls in the changing rooms of the local swimming facility.

According to reports, Mumford claimed that he gained access to the leisure centre’s swimming pool under the guise of medical necessity. He reportedly told his doctor that he wanted to use the pool for therapeutic reasons, specifically to help with his anxiety. The doctor then prescribed him free swimming sessions, which Mumford exploited to carry out his illicit activities.

It was during one of these visits that Mumford’s disturbing behavior was uncovered. A young woman, while in the process of changing, noticed something unusual. As she was undressing and drying herself, she looked down and saw a man’s head peeking out from beneath the cubicle wall. Horrified, she immediately ran out of the changing room, screaming for her boyfriend’s help. The incident prompted immediate police intervention.

Law enforcement officers responded swiftly. They detained Mumford and conducted searches of his locker at the leisure centre as well as his home. The police found a collection of women’s and children’s underwear, along with a Samsung digital camera. On the device, they discovered nearly 900 images, including photographs and videos of women and children as young as eight years old. Many of these images appeared to have been filmed covertly through a hole in a cubicle wall, indicating premeditated voyeurism.

Further investigation revealed that Mumford had a history of seeking out swimming as a form of therapy. A note from his medical records dated April 2014 indicated his desire to spend more time swimming, citing the therapeutic benefits. He had inquired at his doctor’s surgery about the availability of free prescribed swimming sessions, which he then used to facilitate his voyeuristic activities.

During police interviews, Mumford admitted to wearing women’s size six underwear beneath his swimming shorts while at the pool. He also confessed to filming children as young as eight years old during their private moments in the changing rooms. His collection of images and videos was extensive, with police discovering thousands of illicit photographs and recordings.

Prosecutor Duncan O’Donnell, presenting the case at Reading Crown Court, detailed the extent of Mumford’s offending. He explained that Mumford had been caught red-handed and that the police found a variety of inappropriate items, including a pair of women’s black knickers, a pink polka-dot pair belonging to a 10-year-old girl, a blue and pink thong, and the camera containing the illicit images.

O’Donnell highlighted that eleven of the files on the camera were recorded within the changing room environment, filmed through a hole in a cubicle wall. Mumford’s actions were clearly premeditated and deeply invasive, causing significant distress to his victims.

In court, Mumford, of Bamburgh Close, Reading, pleaded guilty to 14 counts of making indecent images of children and two counts of spying on a person doing a private act. His defense argued that he would struggle in prison and suggested that a community order would be more appropriate. The defense lawyer, Sophie Murray, emphasized that supervision over a longer period would better address Mumford’s underlying issues and help prevent future offending.

However, the judge, Mr. Recorder Persaud, sentenced Mumford to 34 months in prison. He expressed his disapproval of Mumford’s actions, stating, “You are ashamed of what you have done in the past. You went to the leisure centre with a camera and you filmed people undressing. There are images of young children. The victims would have been horrified if they had known what you were doing.”

Additionally, Mumford was issued a Sexual Harm Prevention Order for ten years, aimed at restricting his future conduct and protecting the community from further harm.