ANTHONY CLARKE FROM BRETFORTON CAUGHT WITH OVER 1,200 CHILD INDECENT IMAGES IN WORCESTER

In April 2009, a disturbing case emerged involving Anthony Clarke, a resident of Bretforton, who was found to possess an alarming collection of indecent images of children. The investigation was initiated after police received a tip-off from Russia, leading to the seizure of Clarke’s laptop. Upon examination, authorities uncovered a total of 1,212 indecent images stored within a specific folder on the device.

Clarke, a 51-year-old man and former children’s cricket coach, claimed that his initial intention was to download adult pornography. However, the police discovered that the images in question were all classified as level one, depicting children both dressed and undressed. These images were stored on a laptop that Clarke had purchased for his 17-year-old daughter, raising further concerns about his access and intent.

During police interviews, Clarke admitted to viewing the images out of curiosity. He explained to officers that he believed the children depicted were between the ages of 10 and 15. Prosecutor Adrian Jones stated in court that Clarke acknowledged the presence of child pornography on his computer and accepted ownership of the device. Clarke’s comments included the remark, “You do not know what is out there until you look at it,” which underscored his justification for his actions.

Despite the disturbing nature of the images, magistrates were informed that Clarke, who also has a two-month-old granddaughter, does not have a perverted interest in children and has no prior criminal record. The court was told that Clarke had not actively sought out all the images, nor had he intentionally downloaded photographs of children while searching for adult material.

In sentencing, Clarke was given a three-year community order, which includes a 36-month supervision requirement. He was also mandated to participate in a community sex offending group work program, pay costs amounting to £500, and register as a sex offender for a period of five years. The case highlighted the serious nature of possession of indecent images, even when the individual claims curiosity as the motive, and underscored the importance of legal consequences for such offenses.