ANDREW THORNTON FROM YOKER INVOLVED IN CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CASE AT DUMBARTON COURT

In September 2020, a disturbing case emerged involving Andrew Thornton, a resident of Yoker, who was found to possess an alarming collection of nearly 380,000 indecent images of children on his home computer. The police investigation uncovered this extensive cache during a raid at his former residence on Dovehole Avenue. Despite the overwhelming evidence, Thornton maintained a controversial stance, claiming that he did not believe his actions were illegal, and alleged that a social worker had prevented him from speaking freely during an interview.

Andrew Thornton, aged 33 at the time, faced charges related to the possession of indecent photographs and pseudo-photographs of children. The charges covered a period from September 2015 to July 2016. The police operation that led to his arrest took place on May 24, 2017, during which authorities discovered approximately 374,926 still images and 4,442 moving images depicting children in various states of exploitation. These findings were presented in court, highlighting the severity of the case.

Thornton was scheduled for sentencing in March of the following year. However, the proceedings were postponed to allow prosecutors to investigate a claim he made to a social worker, asserting that he was unaware that the material he was downloading was child pornography. The case was further delayed due to the COVID-19 lockdown, which disrupted court schedules and administrative processes.

Most recently, Thornton appeared at Dumbarton Sheriff Court, where the case was once again adjourned. Concerns were raised regarding a supplementary social work report, prompting the sheriff, Maxwell Hendry, to express skepticism about Thornton’s claims. Sheriff Hendry stated that he had “huge questions” about whether Thornton’s guilty plea in January was genuine or simply a plea of convenience. The sheriff noted that a report indicated Thornton “categorically denies seeing a single indecent photograph” and “denies emphatically that any of the recovered images were downloaded and viewed.”

Furthermore, the report suggested that Thornton had failed to accept responsibility for the offence and did not recognize the gravity of his conviction. Sheriff Hendry remarked on the case’s troubling nature and expressed uncertainty about whether prison was an appropriate punishment, given Thornton’s lack of prior convictions, his age, and health issues. Nonetheless, he emphasized that prison remained a possibility, stating, “It would be highly unusual to send a person in those circumstances to prison – but I want you to understand that I’m not ruling that option out.”

The case has been scheduled to return to court on October 27, where the sheriff will also consider an application from the Crown for a sexual offences prevention order, which aims to restrict Thornton’s activities and protect the community from potential harm.