GUILDFORD MAN JOTHI PARAM SENTENCED FOR THOUSANDS OF INDECENT IMAGES OF CHILDREN

In a case that has sent shockwaves through the community of Guildford, Jothi Param, a 55-year-old IT consultant, was sentenced to 13 months in prison after being found guilty of possessing an alarming collection of over 9,000 indecent images of children. The images, which included photographs of infants as young as six months old, were discovered during a police search of his residence in The Mount, Guildford, in January of the previous year.

Guildford Crown Court heard that the investigation into Param’s activities was part of an extensive international effort targeting online forums notorious for sharing illegal content. The police action was triggered by digital evidence linking Param to the possession of these illicit images. Although he initially denied any involvement when questioned by authorities, he later pleaded guilty during an earlier court hearing in the summer of 2012.

Judge Neil Stewart, presiding over the case, emphasized the gravity of the offense, stating that by accessing these images, Param was actively encouraging the abuse and exploitation of children. The court was informed that the images and videos were stored on both a computer and an external hard drive, with the majority—8,747 of the total 9,317 images—classified as the least severe, or level one. However, a significant number of images fell into more serious categories, with approximately 400 images categorized as level two and three, 166 as level four, and four images deemed the most severe, classified as level five.

Prosecutor Rachel Davies detailed the disturbing nature of the content, noting that many images depicted prepubescent girls, with some involving boys. The children featured were mostly between the ages of five and eleven, highlighting the heinous nature of the material. She also clarified that Param claimed he had stumbled upon links to these images on various websites and denied actively searching for such content. Despite this, he admitted to visiting these sites once a week since first encountering them, though he insisted he had no sexual interest in children and was not sexually aroused by the images.

The investigation revealed that the images were first downloaded in February 2009 and subsequently saved to the external hard drive in October 2010. Importantly, there was no evidence to suggest that Param had distributed the images to others, and the court was told that he had not engaged in any sharing activities.

Param, who was born in Malaysia and raised in an orphanage, moved to England in 1976. Over the years, he achieved various academic qualifications and built a career as a consultant for major companies. He also mentored adults who were establishing their own businesses. His defense lawyer, Barbara Down, painted a different picture of Param, emphasizing his otherwise commendable life and achievements. She acknowledged that he had a “life to be proud of” before his arrest and suggested that he had taken time to come to terms with his actions.

Down also highlighted Param’s health issues, including a heart attack three years prior and severe sleep apnea, which she argued would make incarceration particularly difficult for him. She requested that the court consider a suspended sentence, given his health and the impact on his family, especially his wife, who had been devastated by the revelations.

However, Judge Stewart was unequivocal in his sentencing, stating that this case was not suitable for a suspended sentence due to the seriousness of the offenses. He pointed out the large volume of images, including those involving very young children and infants, and emphasized that Param’s computer skills and persistent online activity exacerbated the severity of the crime. The judge remarked that the defendant initially attempted to conceal his activities during police interviews but acknowledged his guilty plea, which resulted in a reduction of the sentence from 18 months to 13 months.

In addition to his prison term, Param will be subject to a sexual offences prevention order for ten years. This order will restrict his contact with children under 16 and limit his internet usage, aiming to prevent any future offenses and protect vulnerable minors from exploitation.