JOANNE GIBSON FROM BROADSTAIRS INVOLVED IN CHILD SEX OFFENSES AND SENTENCED AFTER TEXT MESSAGE REVELATIONS
| Red Rose Database
Broadstairs Sexual Abuser
In a disturbing case that has shocked the community, Joanne Gibson, a 25-year-old resident of Church Square, Broadstairs, was implicated in a series of serious criminal activities involving child exploitation and illegal images. The case came to light after police investigations uncovered explicit communications and illicit material linked to her and her former partner, Andrew Colyer, a 50-year-old man from Tunbridge Wells.
Andrew Colyer, who was awaiting trial on charges related to child abuse images, was found dead in his cell at Elmley Prison last November. His death occurred while he was in custody, and it marked a tragic end to a case that had already begun to unravel the extent of his alleged criminal behavior. Despite his death, the court was presented with evidence of his disturbing communications with Joanne Gibson, which played a crucial role in her conviction.
During proceedings at Canterbury Crown Court, prosecutors read aloud extracts from Colyer’s phone messages to Gibson, revealing a pattern of disturbing and manipulative exchanges. These messages included explicit requests for her to take photographs of children, a request she initially claimed to have resisted. However, forensic examination of her mobile phone revealed that she had indeed taken photographs and even made a video involving a child, which she subsequently sent to Colyer. This evidence was pivotal in establishing her involvement in the illegal activities.
Gibson, who had expressed an interest in a career in child care, admitted to knowing that her boyfriend possessed child sex images on his computer. She also confessed that Colyer had openly discussed his perverted attraction to minors. Despite her awareness, she chose not to report him to the authorities and instead agreed to supply child images herself. She claimed that during their intimate moments, Colyer would force her to view these disgusting images, which she found repulsive but felt compelled to comply with due to his controlling and abusive behavior.
Further revelations showed that Gibson fabricated a story about a sexual encounter involving a child, intending to arouse Colyer’s interest. Prosecutor Eloise Marshall highlighted that the text messages exchanged between the two indicated that Gibson was not generally coerced or threatened, but rather appeared to be willingly participating in the illicit activities. Some of the messages included phrases like, “I need you constantly. I want videos. Good ones. OK?” and “I have never stopped loving you. How are we going to meet up soon? You are still my girl.” Other messages expressed her longing and desire for more explicit content, with one stating, “My Joanne. I love you. I want some video action, darling. When you going to start sorting some?”
Defense attorney Oliver Kirk argued that Colyer was a controlling and abusive individual who exerted significant influence over Gibson’s life. He described Colyer as a man with a history of violence, including allegations of assault on previous partners, and claimed that he controlled where Gibson lived and who she interacted with. Kirk recounted an incident where Gibson was assaulted by Colyer, resulting in her losing consciousness and suffering a broken nose. He emphasized that Gibson was a vulnerable young woman who was manipulated and coerced into participating in these criminal acts.
In her testimony, Gibson described how Colyer’s demands and abusive behavior left her physically and emotionally exhausted. She revealed that he would urinate on her and subjected her to constant demands that she found impossible to resist. Her account painted a picture of a young woman overwhelmed by her partner’s control, leading her to take the illicit photographs under duress. Kirk read a message from Colyer sent after Gibson’s police report, in which he called her a “revolting piece of sh-t” and a “disgusting low-life slut,” further illustrating his violent and threatening nature. He also threatened to harm her, stating he would “beat you, drown you and slit its(her) throat.”
Gibson maintained that she did not have any sexual interest in children and was simply a confused and manipulated individual. Her lawyer argued that her involvement was a result of her vulnerability and confusion, and that a prison sentence would have a devastating impact on her. Ultimately, Judge Heather Norton sentenced Gibson to a ten-month jail term, suspended for two years. In her sentencing remarks, the judge acknowledged Gibson’s inconsistent accounts during psychiatric evaluations and emphasized that she had multiple opportunities to seek help or report Colyer’s abuse but chose not to.
Furthermore, the court imposed a five-year Sex Offences Prevention Order, prohibiting Gibson from having any unauthorized contact with minors and barring her from working with children. The judge made it clear that her actions and associations had serious consequences, and she would be closely monitored to prevent further offenses. This case serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of manipulation and abuse, and the importance of vigilance in protecting vulnerable individuals from exploitation.
Andrew Colyer, who was awaiting trial on charges related to child abuse images, was found dead in his cell at Elmley Prison last November. His death occurred while he was in custody, and it marked a tragic end to a case that had already begun to unravel the extent of his alleged criminal behavior. Despite his death, the court was presented with evidence of his disturbing communications with Joanne Gibson, which played a crucial role in her conviction.
During proceedings at Canterbury Crown Court, prosecutors read aloud extracts from Colyer’s phone messages to Gibson, revealing a pattern of disturbing and manipulative exchanges. These messages included explicit requests for her to take photographs of children, a request she initially claimed to have resisted. However, forensic examination of her mobile phone revealed that she had indeed taken photographs and even made a video involving a child, which she subsequently sent to Colyer. This evidence was pivotal in establishing her involvement in the illegal activities.
Gibson, who had expressed an interest in a career in child care, admitted to knowing that her boyfriend possessed child sex images on his computer. She also confessed that Colyer had openly discussed his perverted attraction to minors. Despite her awareness, she chose not to report him to the authorities and instead agreed to supply child images herself. She claimed that during their intimate moments, Colyer would force her to view these disgusting images, which she found repulsive but felt compelled to comply with due to his controlling and abusive behavior.
Further revelations showed that Gibson fabricated a story about a sexual encounter involving a child, intending to arouse Colyer’s interest. Prosecutor Eloise Marshall highlighted that the text messages exchanged between the two indicated that Gibson was not generally coerced or threatened, but rather appeared to be willingly participating in the illicit activities. Some of the messages included phrases like, “I need you constantly. I want videos. Good ones. OK?” and “I have never stopped loving you. How are we going to meet up soon? You are still my girl.” Other messages expressed her longing and desire for more explicit content, with one stating, “My Joanne. I love you. I want some video action, darling. When you going to start sorting some?”
Defense attorney Oliver Kirk argued that Colyer was a controlling and abusive individual who exerted significant influence over Gibson’s life. He described Colyer as a man with a history of violence, including allegations of assault on previous partners, and claimed that he controlled where Gibson lived and who she interacted with. Kirk recounted an incident where Gibson was assaulted by Colyer, resulting in her losing consciousness and suffering a broken nose. He emphasized that Gibson was a vulnerable young woman who was manipulated and coerced into participating in these criminal acts.
In her testimony, Gibson described how Colyer’s demands and abusive behavior left her physically and emotionally exhausted. She revealed that he would urinate on her and subjected her to constant demands that she found impossible to resist. Her account painted a picture of a young woman overwhelmed by her partner’s control, leading her to take the illicit photographs under duress. Kirk read a message from Colyer sent after Gibson’s police report, in which he called her a “revolting piece of sh-t” and a “disgusting low-life slut,” further illustrating his violent and threatening nature. He also threatened to harm her, stating he would “beat you, drown you and slit its(her) throat.”
Gibson maintained that she did not have any sexual interest in children and was simply a confused and manipulated individual. Her lawyer argued that her involvement was a result of her vulnerability and confusion, and that a prison sentence would have a devastating impact on her. Ultimately, Judge Heather Norton sentenced Gibson to a ten-month jail term, suspended for two years. In her sentencing remarks, the judge acknowledged Gibson’s inconsistent accounts during psychiatric evaluations and emphasized that she had multiple opportunities to seek help or report Colyer’s abuse but chose not to.
Furthermore, the court imposed a five-year Sex Offences Prevention Order, prohibiting Gibson from having any unauthorized contact with minors and barring her from working with children. The judge made it clear that her actions and associations had serious consequences, and she would be closely monitored to prevent further offenses. This case serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of manipulation and abuse, and the importance of vigilance in protecting vulnerable individuals from exploitation.