MICHAEL BROWN CONVICTED IN BARNOLDSWICK FOR HIDING LAPTOPS AND PHONE DURING SEX OFFENDER CHECK
| Red Rose Database
Barnoldswick Sexual Abuser
In November 2017, authorities in Barnoldswick took action against Michael Brown, a convicted sex offender, after discovering he had concealed multiple electronic devices during a routine police inspection.
Police officers arrived at Brown's residence on Park Road in Barnoldswick to conduct a compliance check related to his sexual offences prevention order (Sopo). The officers initially inquired about the presence of internet-enabled devices, and Brown claimed that he only possessed an Xbox console, which was visible during their visit.
However, the situation took a different turn when Brown handed over a mobile phone after officers observed its packaging. When pressed further, he also volunteered a laptop computer, raising suspicions about the completeness of his disclosures.
Subsequently, the police conducted a more thorough search of Brown's home and uncovered three additional laptops hidden within the premises. These devices were not initially disclosed by Brown, which led to serious concerns about his compliance with the conditions of his Sopo.
During the hearing at Blackburn Magistrates' Court, it was revealed that Brown, aged 61 and residing on Park Road, Barnoldswick, had pleaded guilty to breaching the terms of his sexual offences prevention order. He was subsequently remanded on bail and scheduled to be sentenced at Burnley Crown Court on December 18.
Prosecutor Andy Robinson emphasized that a key condition of Brown's Sopo required him to present any internet-enabled devices to the police for inspection. During a routine visit, officers asked Brown if he possessed any devices beyond the Xbox, to which he initially responded negatively.
Mr. Robinson explained, "They discovered the mobile phone box at which point he volunteered a Samsung phone. They asked if there were any further devices and this time he volunteered a laptop. He was asked again and said no but the officers went on to discover three more laptops."
Brown's defense attorney, Keith Rennison, argued that his client had simply forgotten about the additional laptops. He suggested that Brown believed some of the devices had been returned to him by police after previous investigations, implying a lack of malicious intent but acknowledging the breach of the court order.
Overall, the case highlights the ongoing challenges law enforcement faces in ensuring compliance among convicted offenders, especially regarding the disclosure of electronic devices that could potentially be used to facilitate further offenses.
Police officers arrived at Brown's residence on Park Road in Barnoldswick to conduct a compliance check related to his sexual offences prevention order (Sopo). The officers initially inquired about the presence of internet-enabled devices, and Brown claimed that he only possessed an Xbox console, which was visible during their visit.
However, the situation took a different turn when Brown handed over a mobile phone after officers observed its packaging. When pressed further, he also volunteered a laptop computer, raising suspicions about the completeness of his disclosures.
Subsequently, the police conducted a more thorough search of Brown's home and uncovered three additional laptops hidden within the premises. These devices were not initially disclosed by Brown, which led to serious concerns about his compliance with the conditions of his Sopo.
During the hearing at Blackburn Magistrates' Court, it was revealed that Brown, aged 61 and residing on Park Road, Barnoldswick, had pleaded guilty to breaching the terms of his sexual offences prevention order. He was subsequently remanded on bail and scheduled to be sentenced at Burnley Crown Court on December 18.
Prosecutor Andy Robinson emphasized that a key condition of Brown's Sopo required him to present any internet-enabled devices to the police for inspection. During a routine visit, officers asked Brown if he possessed any devices beyond the Xbox, to which he initially responded negatively.
Mr. Robinson explained, "They discovered the mobile phone box at which point he volunteered a Samsung phone. They asked if there were any further devices and this time he volunteered a laptop. He was asked again and said no but the officers went on to discover three more laptops."
Brown's defense attorney, Keith Rennison, argued that his client had simply forgotten about the additional laptops. He suggested that Brown believed some of the devices had been returned to him by police after previous investigations, implying a lack of malicious intent but acknowledging the breach of the court order.
Overall, the case highlights the ongoing challenges law enforcement faces in ensuring compliance among convicted offenders, especially regarding the disclosure of electronic devices that could potentially be used to facilitate further offenses.