BENJAMIN JENNINGS FROM BURWELL FAILS IN COURT APPEAL TO END JAIL SENTENCE

In June 2012, the case of Benjamin Jennings, also known previously as Barry Jacobs, drew significant attention due to his ongoing incarceration and the legal efforts to secure his release. Jennings, a resident of Feltham Close in Burwell, has been detained for over a year beyond the completion of his minimum sentence, which was initially set at three and a half years. His case reached the Court of Appeal, where he sought to have his open-ended sentence quashed and his immediate release granted, but his appeal was ultimately unsuccessful.

Benjamin Jennings, now 41 years old, was convicted following a police sting operation conducted in September 2006. During the operation, Jennings was caught attempting to engage in sexual activities with what he believed was an 11-year-old girl, but in reality, he was communicating with an undercover police officer. His crimes came to light at Cambridge Crown Court, where he admitted to two counts of attempting to engage in sexual activity in the presence of a child, as well as possessing a vast collection of indecent images and videos involving children. The police investigation revealed that Jennings had more than 51,000 indecent photographs and 137 videos stored on his computer.

Despite serving his sentence since 2007, Jennings remains in prison because, under the current legal framework, he cannot be released until the Parole Board determines it is appropriate. His legal team challenged the indefinite nature of his detention, arguing that the open-ended sentence was unjustified. However, on Friday, the Court of Appeal, comprising Lord Justice Moses, Mr Justice Underhill, and Judge Melbourne Inman QC, dismissed his appeal. The court emphasized that there was substantial evidence supporting the original decision made by Cambridge Crown Court, which found Jennings to be a genuine risk to children.

The court heard that Jennings had initiated contact with an 11-year-old girl via the internet. The girl’s mother discovered the online communication and contacted law enforcement authorities. Police officers then took over the online conversation, posing as the young girl, and recorded Jennings exposing himself on webcam and discussing sexual topics. Following the investigation, police raided Jennings’ home and examined his computer, uncovering the extensive collection of indecent images and videos involving children.

While Jennings’ legal team succeeded in reducing his minimum term from three and a half years to two years, they failed to persuade the court that his open-ended sentence was inappropriate. The judges noted that, despite having served beyond his minimum term, Jennings was not prioritized for participation in rehabilitation courses that could demonstrate to the Parole Board that he no longer posed a risk. The court stated that the evidence, including assessments from a psychiatrist and the pre-sentence report, clearly indicated the ongoing danger Jennings represented. The judges concluded that the legal obligation to impose an indeterminate sentence was justified based on the evidence presented.

In their ruling, the appeal court acknowledged the difficulties Jennings faced in accessing the necessary courses to prove his rehabilitation. However, they emphasized that such issues were beyond the court’s authority to resolve. The decision underscores the seriousness with which the justice system treats cases involving child exploitation and the importance of public safety in sentencing decisions.