PAUL MILFORD FROM AMESBURY SENTENCED FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENSES IN WINCHESTER

In February 2019, Paul Milford, a 49-year-old resident of Amesbury in Wiltshire, was brought before Winchester Crown Court to face charges related to the possession of indecent images of children. The case drew significant attention due to the nature of the offences and Milford's background as a businessman involved in operating a children's inflatable bouncy castle enterprise.

Initially, Milford denied the allegations when questioned by police. However, as the investigation progressed and the evidence was presented, he ultimately pleaded guilty to the charges before his trial was scheduled to commence. This change of plea came after authorities uncovered disturbing material linked to him.

The police investigation was initiated after a tip-off suggested that Milford had been downloading illicit images of minors from a website. Following this lead, law enforcement officials conducted a thorough analysis of Milford's computer equipment. The forensic examination revealed a collection of sexual images of children stored on his devices. Additionally, investigators discovered that Milford had taken indecent photographs of a young girl himself, further implicating him in the offences.

In sentencing, the court opted against imprisonment, instead imposing a two-year Community Order. This order included a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement, aimed at addressing the underlying issues related to his offending, as well as a period of Unpaid Work. Furthermore, Milford was subjected to the Notification Requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for a duration of five years, mandating regular reporting and monitoring.

To prevent any further offences, Milford was also placed under a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) for five years. The order enforces strict limitations on his access to technology and internet-enabled devices. Among the restrictions are prohibitions on possessing any computer or similar device capable of internet access unless he informs the local police's Public Protection Unit beforehand. He is also barred from purchasing, downloading, or obtaining software that could overwrite computer memory, and from using any device capable of internet access unless it retains and displays browsing history, which must be available for police inspection upon request.

Additional restrictions include a ban on deleting internet history, using private or incognito browsing modes, and acquiring new internet-enabled devices without notifying his monitoring officer within three days. Milford is also prohibited from purchasing or using encrypted data storage devices, further limiting his ability to conceal or manipulate digital evidence. These measures are designed to prevent any recurrence of his offending and to protect potential victims from harm in the future.