ROBERT LANGLEY BREACHES SEXUAL OFFENCES ORDER IN CAMBORNE AND TRURO

In a case that has raised serious concerns about compliance with court restrictions, 37-year-old Robert Langley from Camborne found himself back in legal trouble less than two months after receiving a suspended prison sentence.

Just five weeks following his sentencing, Langley was found to have violated a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) on two separate occasions. The order explicitly prohibited him from being in the company of any child under the age of 18 unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Despite this clear restriction, Langley admitted to breaching the order twice, actions that ultimately led to his detention in Truro Crown Court.

During the hearing, Judge Christopher Elwen sentenced Langley to six months in prison. Additionally, he ordered that Langley serve a consecutive 40-week term, which would be added to the remaining period of his previously suspended sentence. The 51 days Langley had already spent on remand at HMP Exeter would be credited towards his new sentence, effectively reducing his time behind bars.

Langley’s original conviction stemmed from an incident in October 2009, when his former wife discovered indecent images of children stored on her computer. The images were found after their separation, although at the time, she was providing him with accommodation at Twelveheads, near Truro. The court heard that Langley’s criminal history dates back to 1992, with multiple convictions related to sexual offences.

The breaches in question occurred in November 2009. Prosecutor Robert Linford explained that on November 13, Langley was asked by a woman he knew to help resolve an issue with her fireplace. The two purchased alcohol, and Langley became intoxicated. During this episode, he reportedly banged his head against a post on the landing and knocked himself out. The woman, unaware of Langley’s past offences, then put him to bed in a spare room that was occupied by her 17-year-old daughter.

The following day, Langley took the woman’s 11-year-old son to a local pub to play pool. This act also constituted a breach of the SOPO, although there was no evidence to suggest he physically harmed the boy. Prosecutor Linford emphasized that these actions demonstrated a disregard for the court’s restrictions.

During the proceedings, Langley’s defence solicitor, Barrie van den Berg, explained that his client had been reluctant to disclose his past due to the intense publicity following his initial sentencing in October. He also noted that Langley was intoxicated during the first breach, with the mother sleeping in the next room and other people present in the pub. Van den Berg described Langley’s behaviour as “acts of stupidity” and acknowledged that his client recognized the poor judgment involved.

As part of the court’s ruling, Judge Elwen confirmed that the SOPO would remain in effect for the full ten-year duration, and Langley would be required to continue registering as a sex offender for the same period. The case underscores ongoing concerns about the monitoring and enforcement of court orders designed to protect minors and prevent reoffending.