ANDREW REES FROM DEVIZES ESCAPES JAIL AFTER CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CHARGES IN LONG AND DEVIZES

In August 2010, a case involving a well-known businessman from Hampshire drew significant attention when he was found to have committed serious offenses related to child pornography. Andrew Rees-Long, a prominent figure in the local business community, was discovered to possess a disturbing collection of indecent images and video clips depicting children. The authorities revealed that Rees-Long had accumulated a total of 545 such illicit materials, which included both photographs and film footage.

These images were not only stored privately but also shared with others through online chatrooms, with Rees-Long admitting to distributing 64 images across six separate charges. Prosecutor Colin Meeke detailed that the majority of these images—specifically 527—depicted children under the age of 13, some as young as just one year old. The severity of the material was underscored by the fact that 120 pictures and two video clips were classified at level four, and an additional 50 images fell into the most serious category, level five, indicating extreme pornography.

It was further revealed during court proceedings that Rees-Long, aged 42 at the time, had been accessing and downloading these images over a span of four years, from July 2005 through June 2009. This prolonged period of offending highlighted a disturbing pattern of behavior that persisted over several years.

Rees-Long, who serves as the general manager of DWB Long Ltd, a wholesale fruit and vegetable business based in Whiteparish, Hampshire, faced the court with his defense attorney, William Mousley. The lawyer acknowledged the gravity of the offenses but emphasized that Rees-Long had taken immediate steps to seek treatment following his arrest. He also pointed out that Rees-Long had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and had fully cooperated with law enforcement authorities.

In his defense, Mousley explained that the business, which is family-run and has multiple outlets across the south—including Southampton, Bournemouth, Ringwood, and Romsey—would suffer significantly if Rees-Long were to be imprisoned. He highlighted the importance of Rees-Long’s role within the company, describing him as a key figure whose absence would have a detrimental impact on the livelihood of many employees and the business’s overall stability.

Addressing the court, Mousley acknowledged the seriousness of the offenses, stating, “He doesn’t shy away from the fact that these are serious offences. Pressures in his family life and at work, where he holds a position of considerable responsibility, led to him spending more and more time on the computer and getting drawn into the despicable business of looking at and distributing this sort of material. The effect on those other innocent people is likely to be very significant because he is the lifeblood of that business and always has been.”

He further emphasized that Rees-Long, a married man and father of two, would face severe financial hardship if he were to be sent to prison, potentially jeopardizing his family’s well-being.

Ultimately, the sentencing was handed down by Salisbury Crown Court Judge Dixon. The judge described the images as “truly dreadful,” emphasizing that they involved real children subjected to appalling and degrading treatment. Faced with a difficult choice, the judge opted against immediate imprisonment, considering the potential impact on Rees-Long’s family and business.

Instead, he imposed a three-year community order, which included supervision and a requirement to attend a sex offenders’ treatment program. Additionally, Rees-Long was ordered to sign the sex offenders’ register and remain on it for five years. Judge Dixon concluded by offering a note of cautious optimism, stating, “You have the chance to rebuild your life, return to society and make sure this doesn’t happen again.”