CRAIG DUNDARDLE FROM CORWEN SENTENCED FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND VOYEURISM AT CHESTER COURT

In September 2021, Craig Dunderdale, a man previously residing at Eversley Court in Chester and now living with his parents in Corwen, faced serious criminal charges related to child exploitation and voyeurism. The case revealed a disturbing pattern of illegal activity involving the possession of over 100 indecent images of children, alongside the filming of a woman sunbathing without her knowledge or consent.

On Thursday, September 23, at Chester Crown Court, Recorder Richard Pratt delivered a verdict that reflected the gravity of Dunderdale’s offenses. The court heard that police had arrested Dunderdale at his Corwen residence on May 14, 2020, after suspicions arose that he was downloading and possessing indecent images. These suspicions were confirmed when authorities seized his computer and mobile phone for examination.

The investigation uncovered a total of six indecent images, including one video, classified as Category A, which is considered the most severe level of such material. In addition, there were 29 images at Category B and 85 at Category C. The police also found a staggering 1,667 extreme pornography images and 64 prohibited images of children. The majority of these images depicted girls aged between six and 12 years old. Dunderdale had actively searched for such material, as evidenced by the search terms stored on his devices.

Further disturbing evidence was uncovered on Dunderdale’s phone, which contained 50 images and three videos of a woman sunbathing. Authorities managed to identify the woman and informed her of Dunderdale’s actions. She was present in court to read her victim impact statement, describing how her life had been affected. She expressed that she now suffers from “massive anxiety” and felt that Dunderdale had “completely degraded” her and invaded her privacy. Her words conveyed her deep sense of violation and anger, stating, “You deserve nothing but prison time in my opinion. I can honestly say I hate you.”

During police interviews, Dunderdale admitted to the offenses, confessing that he derived sexual gratification from the images and videos he had collected. The court was particularly distressed by the discovery of the footage of the woman sunbathing, which was deemed especially invasive and unacceptable. Recorder Pratt emphasized that the possession and distribution of such images and videos are profoundly offensive to societal standards, describing Dunderdale’s behavior as “nothing short of disgraceful.”

While the law allows for a starting sentence of six months for voyeurism, the judge explained that sentencing guidelines are set by Parliament and the Sentencing Council. Recognizing the potential for rehabilitation, the court suspended Dunderdale’s prison sentence for 18 months, provided he complies with certain conditions. These include paying a token sum of £4,000 in compensation to the victim, completing 30 days of rehabilitation activities, and performing 150 hours of unpaid community service.

Additionally, Dunderdale is subject to a four-month curfew from 9 pm to 7 am at his parents’ address, and he is under a five-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order that restricts his internet usage. He is also required to register as a sex offender for the next ten years. The court’s ruling aims to balance punishment with the possibility of reform, but it underscores the seriousness of his crimes and the impact on the victims involved.