WILLIAM BROWN'S SHOCKING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND FRAUD CASE IN SELKIRK AND GALASHIELS

In a disturbing series of events that have shocked the communities of Selkirk and Galashiels, William Brown, a man with ties to both locations, has been embroiled in serious criminal investigations involving child exploitation images and financial fraud.

Back in December 2014, authorities from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) conducted a raid on Brown’s residence located on Bleachfield Road in Selkirk as part of an investigation into a £15,000 VAT scam. During the search, officers uncovered a troubling collection of naked images of children stored on his computer. The discovery prompted immediate police involvement, and the authorities seized digital devices, SIM cards, memory cards, and physical copies of explicit material.

The court proceedings revealed that Brown, then 35 years old and residing at Torwoodlee Road in Galashiels, possessed a total of 61 indecent images of children classified at level one on the severity scale—indicating the least serious category of such material. It was further disclosed that Brown had used specific search terms such as “naked photos of young 10-year-old boys” and “child porn” on his computer, which was located at his home in Selkirk on May 8, 2013.

Brown pleaded guilty to the charge of possessing indecent images of children. In his defense, he described himself as “socially awkward” and claimed to be “a victim of society for most of his life,” a statement that drew attention during the court hearing. As a consequence of his guilty plea, he was ordered to complete 50 hours of unpaid community service. Additionally, the court mandated that his name be entered onto the Sex Offenders Register, reflecting the gravity of his offense.

Sheriff Derrick McIntyre presided over the case and questioned Brown about the background reports, during which Brown maintained that he had no knowledge of how the images came to be on his computer. However, Ms. Clinkscale, representing the prosecution, noted that it was not uncommon for individuals convicted of such offenses to be in denial or to feel embarrassed about their actions.

Despite the serious nature of the offense, Sheriff McIntyre acknowledged that Brown appeared to be a first-time offender for this type of crime. He indicated that a community-based disposal was appropriate, emphasizing that had the images been of a higher level of severity, prison time would have been almost certain. The sheriff explicitly stated, “This is not a victimless crime,” underscoring the harm caused by such offenses.

Given that Brown was already serving a sentence of 250 hours of unpaid work for the VAT fraud, the court imposed an additional 50 hours, bringing his total community service hours to the maximum of 300. This combined sentence reflects the court’s recognition of the seriousness of his criminal conduct and the need for appropriate punishment.

Earlier, in November 2014, during the investigation into the attempted fraud, authorities uncovered the same collection of indecent images at Brown’s residence in Selkirk. The investigation into the £15,500 fraud involved HMRC officers executing a warrant at his Bleachfield Road home, where they discovered the images along with other incriminating evidence such as magazines and physical photographs of a pornographic nature. The images, all classified at level one, were found in both digital and hard copy formats.

Prosecutor Graham Fraser explained that the images were discovered during the search, and police were subsequently informed. The subsequent investigation revealed that Brown had attempted to defraud HMRC by falsely claiming to be a director of Capture That Moment Ltd, with the intent to recover VAT payments totaling £15,595 between February 4 and February 21 of the previous year. Brown’s claim involved fabricated expenses, which were ultimately deemed to be entirely unsubstantiated and doomed to failure from the outset.

During the court hearing at Selkirk Sheriff Court, Brown admitted to the fraud charges and was sentenced to a community payback order, requiring him to complete 250 hours of unpaid work within 18 months. His lawyer, Robert More, explained that Brown’s business had minimal trade, and the initial claim was made in an attempt to recover funds, but it was clear that he could not substantiate his claims, leading to suspicion from HMRC.

Sheriff Peter Paterson warned Brown that his sentence was an alternative to imprisonment. He emphasized that although the attempt was inept and doomed to fail, it involved a significant sum of money and demonstrated a serious breach of trust and legal conduct.

Overall, William Brown’s case highlights the severe consequences of engaging in child exploitation and financial fraud, with the courts taking a firm stance on such offenses, especially when they involve vulnerable victims and fraudulent schemes aimed at defrauding government agencies.