Judge in online sex case warns of access dangers to children

The schoolgirl agreed to become a “friend” of Tony Spencer and for a time continued to message him although he told her he was 32.

Richard Wright prosecuting told Leeds Crown Court yesterday Spencer, who has mild learning difficulties, wanted to meet her at a park but the girl refused and also rejected a suggestion that she go to his home.

He told her he would do to her whatever she wanted and she interpreted that as suggesting sexual activity but she just called him a “paedo” which he did not understand, and she said he was stupid.

She never did respond to his advances even after he told her he loved her in e-mails. She said she thought he was ugly after he sent a photo of himself and told him she was not interested.

His activities were uncovered after her mother subsequently spotted one of the messages.

Police then discovered pornographic images of children on Spencer’s computer when it was seized at his home.

Mr Wright said 1,008 images were at level one, the lowest level of seriousness and a total of 10 at level two and four.

Freddy Apfel, for Spencer, said there was no adverse effect on the girl as she had never intended any meeting and he was clearly unsophisticated in his actions since he gave all his own details.

Spencer, 24, of Westgate, Cleckheaton admitted inciting a child to engage in sexual activity and 21 offences of making indecent images.

Imposing a three year community order with supervision and a condition of attending a sex offender treatment programme, Judge Geoffrey Marson QC said that was an exceptional course that was the best way of protecting the public and girls in the long term.

He said Spencer’s intellectual abilities were at the lower end of the scale, he had demonstrated remorse and shame and could be helped. His internet contact was over a short period and a meeting was never going to happen.

He ordered Spencer to register as a sex offender and made a Sexual Offences Prevention Order banning him from contact with the girl, owning a computer or accessing internet sites relating to children.

“The courts principal concern is to protect young girls from themselves and others. This case demonstrates the dangers of unsupervised access by young people to sites such as Facebook.”