MAJID JAVANBAKHT CAUGHT IN NEWCASTLE SEX OFFENDER BREACHES PROTECTION ORDER
In January 2017, a serious incident involving Majid Javanbakht, a known sex offender from Newcastle, unfolded that drew significant attention from law enforcement authorities.The case centered around Javanbakht’s failure to adhere to the strict conditions imposed by his previous court sentence and the breach of a sexual harm prevention order (SHPO).
Javanbakht, aged 35 at the time, had previously been sentenced in October 2016 to a 16-month jail term, which was suspended for 18 months.
This sentence was handed down after he was found guilty of attempting to meet a child following sexual grooming.
The court proceedings revealed that Javanbakht believed he was communicating with a teenage boy on a sex-related website, where he had arranged to meet the individual near a swimming baths in Stockton.
However, the person Javanbakht thought was a minor was actually an adult man operating under a fake profile and a false name.
The man had pretended to be a 15-year-old virgin, claiming he was too young to engage in sexual activity.
When they met near the Stockton swimming baths, the adult revealed his true identity and took Javanbakht to the police station.
During police interviews, Javanbakht claimed he thought the entire situation was a prank or a joke, showing a lack of awareness or concern for the seriousness of his actions.
At the court hearing, Javanbakht maintained that he had no sexual interest in children and described his actions as a “one-off experiment.” He explained that he was “sexually adventurous” and used the website—intended for adults seeking sexual encounters—to contact other adults, not minors.
As part of his sentence, he was ordered to register as a sex offender for ten years and was subject to a sexual harm prevention order (SHPO).
Despite the court’s restrictions, it was later discovered that Javanbakht had been asked to leave the address he had registered with the authorities.
Under the law, he was required to re-register with the police within three days or face being registered as homeless.
This breach was brought to light when, on November 14 of the previous year, Javanbakht was arrested at a Newcastle takeaway.
Prosecutor Jo Kidd informed Teesside Crown Court that he had admitted to breaching both the SHPO and his suspended sentence.
During the hearing, Javanbakht’s defense lawyer, Shaun Routledge, pointed out that the police were aware of his place of employment, implying that he was not attempting to hide his whereabouts.
Judge Simon Bourne-Arton QC, the Recorder of Middlesbrough, addressed Javanbakht directly, emphasizing the importance of respecting the court’s orders.
The judge stated, “You now should know that you’ve got to be careful with the order that was imposed against you.
You cannot ignore it.” He further explained that the breach appeared to be due to incompetence rather than deliberate misconduct, noting that Javanbakht was asked to leave his home but did not go to the police to update his registration.
Instead, he was found to be staying at a location known to the police.
As a result, the judge increased Javanbakht’s sentence to 17 months, suspended for two years, and warned him about the importance of compliance with court orders.
Earlier, in June 2016, Javanbakht had also been involved in a similar incident where he arranged to meet a ‘schoolboy’ on a sex site.
This incident was also facilitated by a paedophile hunter, which led to his eventual court appearance.
Although he avoided immediate imprisonment, he was placed on the sex offenders register and received a suspended sentence.
Throughout these events, Javanbakht, who resides in Shieldfield, Newcastle, maintained that he had no real sexual interest in children and that his actions were isolated and not part of a pattern of exploitation.
Overall, the case highlights the ongoing challenges faced by law enforcement in monitoring and managing sex offenders, especially those who breach their legal restrictions.
Javanbakht’s case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of strict adherence to court orders and the potential consequences of neglecting these legal obligations.
