CHRISTOPHER MURDANAIGUM FROM FOUNTAINHALL ESCAPES JAIL DESPITE 50,000 CHILD INDECENT IMAGES FOUND

In April 2015, a disturbing case emerged involving a university student from Fountainhall who was found to possess an alarming collection of approximately 50,000 indecent images of children on his personal computer. Despite the severity of the material, the individual, Christopher Murdanaigum, was spared immediate imprisonment and instead received a community-based sentence, along with mandatory registration as a sex offender for a period of two years.

The proceedings took place at Jedburgh Sheriff Court on a Tuesday, where 26-year-old Murdanaigum appeared before the judiciary. He was charged with possession of indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children, which he admitted. The court accepted his plea of guilty to this charge, while a separate allegation that he had taken or permitted the taking of such images was withdrawn by the Crown.

According to the prosecutor, Graham Fraser, the investigation was initiated after cyber crime authorities received intelligence that led them to search Murdanaigum’s residence in Fountainhall. During the search, officers discovered that the accused had two computers and a laptop at his flat, which he claimed he used for downloading films and, occasionally, pornography via peer-to-peer file sharing software. When questioned about the presence of indecent images, Murdanaigum suggested that he might have downloaded one by mistake, but he was unsure.

Police seized the laptop and hard drive, which contained a folder with 34 sub-folders, housing roughly 50,000 images taken between April 29 and May 8 of the previous year. The images were predominantly classified at level one, indicating the lowest level of severity, with only 36 images at level two, including 17 movies. The prosecutor noted that these images were at the bottom end of the scale, and it was unclear whether Murdanaigum intentionally excluded higher-level images or if they were absent by chance.

During police interviews, Murdanaigum confirmed that he used the internet to download pornography but insisted he was not actively seeking images of children. He did not respond when cautioned and charged. His legal counsel highlighted that he was residing at Heriot-Watt University’s halls of residence in Edinburgh, studying for a master’s degree in finance and management, and was awaiting confirmation to continue his studies.

The defense argued that the quantity of images was limited to level one material, intended solely for personal use, and that there was no evidence suggesting he engaged in social interactions or sought out such content online. The lawyer emphasized that level one images are indicative of a pornographic interest rather than a predatory intent.

During the hearing, QC Donald Findlay, representing Murdanaigum, described his client as an introverted young man whose interest in adult internet pornography had led him to access inappropriate material. He explained that Murdanaigum had been suffering from severe depression and had taken steps to alter his lifestyle. The lawyer elaborated that the young man’s early years were marked by social withdrawal and excessive gaming, which he believed contributed to his current situation.

Findlay further stated that the interest in adult pornography was driven more by curiosity than sexual predation, and that upon discovering the inappropriate images, Murdanaigum should have deleted them immediately. He expressed that his client was genuinely remorseful and posed no immediate risk to others. Murdanaigum had sought psychological advice to change his behavior, and there was no expectation of repeat offending. The defense argued that a custodial sentence would serve no beneficial purpose.

In response, Sheriff Kevin Drummond acknowledged the large volume of images but noted their low severity level. He considered Murdanaigum’s remorse, understanding of the gravity of his actions, and his mental health struggles, including severe depression. The sheriff ordered that Murdanaigum be subject to a conduct requirement, which would restrict his internet access without prior approval from his supervising officer.

Earlier in February 2015, the same individual was reported to have been found with the same extensive collection of indecent images during a police search of his Fountainhall residence. The images were stored on a hard drive seized during the investigation by Police Scotland’s cyber crime unit. At that time, Murdanaigum, then 25 and a student at Heriot-Watt University, admitted the possession of these images during police interviews. He maintained that he was not actively seeking images of children and was not involved in any social engagement related to such material.

He was subsequently placed on the sex offenders register for five years and was awaiting sentencing scheduled for March. The case highlighted the serious nature of online child exploitation and the importance of judicial discretion in handling such cases, especially when the defendant demonstrates remorse and mental health considerations.