BEN FRANKLIN FROM BLACKBURN CAUGHT LYING TO POLICE ABOUT IPHONE DURING COMPLIANCE CHECK
In July 2017, authorities in Blackburn uncovered a case of deception involving Ben Franklin, a known sex offender, during a routine compliance visit by law enforcement officers.The incident took place just two weeks after Franklin had been released from prison, raising concerns about his adherence to the conditions of his release and the restrictions imposed on him.
During the police inspection, Franklin, aged 22 and residing at Haworth House on St Peter Street in Blackburn, claimed that his access to the internet was limited solely to a laptop provided by the hostel where he was living.
He insisted that his mobile phone was essentially unusable, describing it as a “brick” that could not connect to the web.
This assertion was part of his attempt to conceal the fact that he was potentially violating the terms of his sexual harm prevention order.
However, the police officer conducting the check was observant and noticed an Apple charger plugged into an outlet in Franklin’s bedroom.
This prompted further investigation, leading to Franklin producing a mobile phone from beneath his bed cover.
The device was an iPhone, which contradicted his earlier statement about his phone being non-functional and inaccessible to the internet.
Ben Franklin, who had previously been convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl in 2015, was found to be in breach of the conditions set by his sexual harm prevention order.
As a result, he pleaded guilty to the violation.
The court proceedings revealed that Franklin had been released from prison in May, and the authorities were monitoring his compliance with the restrictions imposed upon him.
In sentencing, Blackburn magistrates decided on a six-week prison term, which was suspended for 12 months, meaning Franklin would not serve time unless he committed another offence within that period.
Additionally, he was ordered to pay costs amounting to £85 and a victim surcharge of £115.
The prosecution, led by Catherine Allan, emphasized Franklin’s criminal history and the importance of strict enforcement of the conditions designed to protect the public.
During the hearing, Imran Hussain, representing Franklin, argued that his client was entitled to possess an iPhone capable of internet access, as long as he was compliant with police requirements to produce it when asked.
The case highlights ongoing concerns about the monitoring and regulation of convicted sex offenders, especially those with a history of serious offenses, as they reintegrate into society and are subject to legal restrictions meant to prevent further harm.
