JUSTIN ANDRE YBERT SENTENCED IN JERSEY FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES

In March 2011, Justin Andre Ybert, a 38-year-old resident of Jersey, faced serious criminal charges related to the possession and distribution of indecent images of children. The case unfolded after authorities executed a warrant at his residence, leading to the seizure of a computer, related electronic equipment, DVDs, and videos. Following his arrest, Ybert was taken in for questioning. During the interview, he chose not to comment initially but later admitted to using the internet to access fetish pornography through various news groups. He specifically expressed an interest in material involving female and equestrian urination, but he denied downloading any child pornography, asserting that he believed such material was wrong and that he was not interested in it.

Ybert claimed that he had received unsolicited emails containing child pornography but had deleted these images upon receipt. When pressed further, he admitted to having a sexual interest in girls aged between 7 and 12 years old, but only when they were dressed in specific outfits such as ballerina or equestrian attire. He insisted that he had never been interested in nude photographs or videos of children and denied downloading any such content. He acknowledged that he understood his sexual preferences were morally wrong and expressed a desire to seek help to address these issues. Following his initial detention, he was released from custody pending further examination of his computer equipment.

Subsequent forensic analysis of Ybert’s computer revealed a disturbing collection of indecent images and videos. The investigation uncovered a total of 997 images and four movies stored on an HP computer, with additional material found on an external USB device—29 images and 20 movies. Evidence indicated that some images had been viewed multiple times, suggesting repeated access. The images were classified according to the Copine scale, with the majority falling into Category 1, which includes the most explicit material. Specifically, on the computer, 944 images and one movie were classified as Category 1, with smaller numbers in Categories 2 through 5. The external device contained 29 Category 1 images, 16 movies, and a few images and videos in other categories, including some classified as Category 3 and 4.

Further illegal pornography was also discovered during the investigation. When re-arrested and re-interviewed, Ybert initially maintained that he had only ever received unsolicited indecent images of children. However, once presented with the evidence, he admitted to actively using news groups and search engines to intentionally seek out, access, and download such material. His actions demonstrated a clear pattern of deliberate engagement with illegal content.

Psychological assessment categorized Ybert as being at a moderate risk of re-offending sexually, though the risk of other types of re-offending was considered low. The court noted his cooperation and guilty plea as mitigating factors, along with his previous good character and expressions of remorse. A psychologist described him as experiencing anxiety and depression, and the stress associated with the proceedings was acknowledged, although the Crown argued that Ybert had brought this stress upon himself.

Ybert had no prior convictions, which was taken into account during sentencing. The court sentenced him to 18 months’ imprisonment for Count 1 and a concurrent 18 months for Count 2, totaling 18 months in custody. The court ordered the forfeiture of his computer and related hardware and mandated registration on the Sex Offender List for a minimum of five years. No restraining orders were issued in this case.

In the sentencing hearing, the court clarified that there were no exceptional circumstances warranting a different approach. The final sentence was set at 12 months’ imprisonment for each count, to run concurrently, with the same orders for hardware forfeiture and sex offender registration. The court emphasized the seriousness of the offenses and the importance of monitoring offenders to protect the community from future harm.