KEVIN PREECE FROM MIDDLESBROUGH CAUGHT IN TEESSIDE STORE UP SKIRT SCANDAL
In August 2014, Kevin Preece, a 49-year-old man residing in Middlesbrough, was once again brought to justice for his disturbing pattern of voyeuristic behavior involving the filming of young girls' undergarments in various stores across the Teesside area.This marked his second conviction related to such offenses, highlighting a troubling history of predatory conduct.
On this occasion, Preece was caught in the act at a TJ Hughes store located in Captain Cook Square, Middlesbrough.
His actions did not go unnoticed; a vigilant father, who was shopping with his family, observed Preece's suspicious behavior near a girl estimated to be between 14 and 15 years old.
Outraged by what he saw, the father promptly alerted the police, prompting immediate investigation.
Following the report, officers from Cleveland Police’s Public Protection Unit examined Preece’s mobile device, which resembled a phone, and discovered over 300 images stored on it.
These images included numerous photographs taken up the skirts of young girls, with victims ranging in age from approximately 12 to 14 years old.
The police identified 17 separate victims from the images, many of whom appeared unaware that they had been photographed in such compromising positions.
One particularly disturbing image involved a girl about five years old, who was captured near toys in a shop, with Preece moving very close to her to take the photograph.
During his arrest on October 28, Preece did not deny his actions.
He admitted to police that he had been engaging in this behavior for some time, stating, “Yes I’ve been doing that, I get a kick out of it.” He produced a device, which was confirmed to be a camera, containing images of young girls.
CCTV footage from the store showed Preece following a girl around with the device in his hand, eventually positioning himself behind her at a make-up stand and then at the checkout counter, where he appeared to bend down and take photographs up her skirt.
Prosecutor Harry Hadfield explained to Teesside Crown Court that Preece had deliberately maneuvered himself into positions to record the girls without their knowledge.
The recordings, all made within Middlesbrough shops, included images taken from beneath their clothing and, in some cases, from the tops of their dresses.
The court was told that none of the victims were aware they had been photographed in such a manner.
In his interview, Preece admitted that he had taken the device with the specific intent of filming under girls’ skirts.
He claimed that he had left his job as an unemployed individual and went directly to shops such as Primark with the purpose of targeting young girls.
He further stated that he would view the images at home for sexual gratification, emphasizing that he did not allow others to see the photographs.
Representing Preece, his defense lawyer John Nixon argued that his client insisted his interest was solely in the underwear and that he was not sexually attracted to children.
Nixon explained that Preece had purchased the camera after losing his job and that none of the images contained nudity, suggesting a lesser severity to his actions.
However, Judge Peter Armstrong was unequivocal in his judgment.
He stated, “You say you are not interested in children themselves, but the nature of your offending is serious and warrants a custodial sentence.” As a result, Preece was sentenced to two years in prison.
Additionally, he was ordered to register as a sex offender for seven years and was issued a five-year Sexual Offense Prevention Order.
This order prohibits him from owning any camera or device capable of internet access, engaging in contact with girls under 16, or using any device to access the internet.
Preece pleaded guilty to seven charges related to the possession of indecent images of children, underscoring the gravity of his offenses.
Kevin Preece’s criminal history includes a previous conviction from 2007, when he was jailed for 21 months for similar offenses involving filming up girls’ skirts in Stockton stores.
His repeated offending pattern demonstrates a persistent violation of societal norms and the safety of minors, prompting the court to impose strict penalties to prevent further harm.
