WHITEHAVEN MAN SHAUN SEWELL SENT TO PRISON FOR REPEATED OFFENCES AGAINST CHILDREN AND BREACHING COURT ORDERS

A resident of Whitehaven, Shaun Sewell, has been found guilty of multiple serious offences involving children, including repeated breaches of court-imposed prevention orders designed to protect minors from harm. His criminal activities span several years, beginning in 2011 and continuing through 2014, during which he committed sexual offences against four different child victims within the Copeland area. These offences included acts of sexual misconduct and the creation and distribution of indecent images of children, highlighting a disturbing pattern of predatory behavior.

In 2014, Sewell was arrested at the age of 22 and subsequently admitted to police the full extent of his crimes. His guilty plea was entered at Carlisle Crown Court, where he faced a total of nine charges, including six counts of sexual activity with a child, possession and distribution of indecent images, stalking, and related offences. The court proceedings revealed the gravity of his actions and the ongoing threat he posed to the community.

During his sentencing in August 2014, Judge Barbara Forrester emphasized the importance of strict supervision and intervention. Sewell was ordered to live with his father in Whitehaven, undergo three years of supervised probation, participate in a sex offenders’ group-work programme, and register as a sex offender for five years. Additionally, a five-year sexual harm prevention order (SHPO) was imposed to restrict his contact with minors. The judge explained that suspending a prison sentence for up to two years would not suffice to allow Sewell to complete the necessary treatment, underscoring the seriousness of his offences and the need for ongoing supervision.

However, less than three weeks after the SHPO was enacted, Sewell violated its terms by making contact with one of his victims. This breach prompted a hearing in November 2014, where Judge Forrester remanded him on conditional bail while an updated background report was prepared. The court was made aware of Sewell’s continued disregard for the restrictions placed upon him.

Despite multiple warnings and court orders, Sewell persisted in breaching the conditions. Less than three weeks after his initial breach, he again contacted the same child, demonstrating a blatant disregard for the court’s authority. In early 2016, he committed further violations by possessing two internet-enabled devices—a gaming console and a smartphone—without the required police-approved monitoring software. These devices were confiscated by authorities. Later that year, in May 2016, Sewell was found to have breached the SHPO once more when police discovered two internet-connected devices at his parents’ home in Bransty, Whitehaven. Although no additional online offences were committed at that time, Sewell admitted to the breaches.

At Carlisle Crown Court, Mr. Justice Turner condemned Sewell’s attitude towards the court orders, suggesting that he viewed the restrictions as optional rather than mandatory. The defence’s appeal for a deferred sentence was rejected, and Sewell was sentenced to immediate imprisonment for 12 months. The judge remarked, “The time must come when the court is no longer able to indulge you with breaches of the order. There is no point having the order if you don’t obey it.”

Throughout the legal proceedings, victims’ statements painted a stark picture of the profound and lasting harm inflicted. One victim expressed, “My whole life has changed. I am nothing like I used to be. He has ruined my life.” Psychological assessments recommended that Sewell complete a sex offenders’ treatment programme to address his behaviour. His defence lawyer, Kim Whittlestone, highlighted his father’s support, his acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and his desire to find work as a labourer upon release.

By May 2016, Shaun Sewell was serving his first custodial sentence as an adult, marking a significant turning point in the court’s stance on offenders who breach court orders. The case underscores the importance of strict enforcement of prevention measures to protect vulnerable children and the community from repeat offenders.