SYDENHAM PIMP MARTIN MALONE AND PAULINE YOUNG SENTENCED FOR CHILDREN'S HOME PROSTITUTION RING IN LONDON

In a disturbing case that has shocked the community, Martin Malone, a 33-year-old man from Sydenham, was sentenced to four years in prison for operating a large-scale prostitution ring involving girls from children's homes. Malone's criminal enterprise was exposed during a court hearing at Southwark Crown Court, revealing the extent of his exploitation and the significant profits he amassed from his illicit activities.

Malone's accomplice, Pauline Young, aged 33 and a former care worker who had previously worked with disabled children, received a comparatively lenient punishment—a 180-hour community service order. Despite her lesser sentence, her involvement in the operation was deemed serious enough to warrant court attention. The court heard that Malone, known by the street name 'M,' had managed to generate hundreds of thousands of pounds through his criminal enterprise.

According to court records, Malone was responsible for transporting girls as young as 14 to various red-light districts across London, including Paddington, Streatham, and Soho. He not only facilitated their entry into prostitution but also provided them with advice on how to attract clients. The girls, who became known collectively as the 'Sexy Young Divas Posse,' charged clients between £20 and £40 per encounter. Most of the earnings were handed over to Malone, who exploited their vulnerability for his own financial gain.

Some of the girls managed to earn as much as £6,000 per month, a figure that underscores the scale of Malone's operation. The court was told that many of these young women were addicted to crack cocaine, while others were simply under Malone's influence due to his commanding personality, which the court described as 'powerful.'

One girl, who attempted to retain some of her earnings, was warned that she and her family would face violent repercussions if she continued to do so. The majority of the 22 children under Malone's control came from troubled backgrounds, many having run away from their homes in search of escape or stability. The court heard that Malone manipulated these vulnerable girls both psychologically and financially, creating a dependency that was difficult for them to break free from.

Judge Andrew Goymer, presiding over the case, delivered a stern sentence to Malone, condemning his exploitation of the young girls. He stated, “What you did was that you took advantage of them for your own profit and gain. You manipulated them by the force of your personality, and also by making it possible for them to continue to finance their addiction. All of them became dependent on you both psychologically and financially and in my mind that is an element of coercion.”

Prosecutor Martin Hicks detailed how Malone operated his illicit business from his basement flat in Sydenham. He explained that the girls fell under Malone’s spell during their most vulnerable moments, willingly carrying out his instructions as part of an elite group known as the 'Posse' or 'SYD'—the Sexy Young Divas. The court was told that Malone admitted to six counts of living off the earnings of prostitution over a period of 20 months, starting from January 1998.

Despite his role as a respected respite care worker and home help for disabled children and their families, Malone’s actions starkly contrasted with his previous reputation. The judge emphasized that Malone, who was trusted by the community, should have known better than to engage in such exploitative behavior.

Outside the court, Chief Inspector Chris Bradford commented on the case, describing Malone’s operation as reminiscent of Dickensian villainy, calling him a 'sexual Fagin' who held a powerful grip over these young girls. Additionally, Kathryn Hudson, the assistant director of Lewisham social services, expressed concern that Malone had known some of these girls before they entered care, highlighting the difficulty in preventing ongoing contact and activities after their involvement with him. The case has raised serious questions about the safeguarding of vulnerable children and the responsibilities of social services in protecting at-risk youth from exploitation.