DOMINIC GIFFORD FROM FEN DITTON SENTENCED FOR CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN CAMBRIDGE
| Red Rose Database
Fen Ditton Child Sexual Abuser
In September 2011, a serious criminal case unfolded involving Dominic Gifford, a software engineer from Fen Ditton, who faced severe charges related to the possession and creation of indecent images of minors. Gifford, aged 33 at the time, admitted to producing a significant number of illicit images and videos depicting children, which led to his conviction and subsequent sentencing.
Gifford pleaded guilty to the production of a total of 1,418 photographs, all classified at the lowest level of severity, known as level one. In addition, he acknowledged creating a single image rated at level two. Beyond these images, he also confessed to making four videos classified at level four, which indicates a higher level of severity. These offenses were committed prior to his arrest on May 12, and the evidence against him was substantial.
The case was brought to light through a police operation that originated in Luxembourg. Authorities there had been monitoring an online forum where users shared and viewed illicit images. By tracking IP addresses associated with the forum, Luxembourg police were able to identify Gifford as a suspect. The investigation revealed that he was residing at his then-home on High Ditch D Road in Fen Ditton, Cambridgeshire.
Following this discovery, officers from Cambridgeshire executed a search warrant at Gifford’s residence. During the raid, they seized his computers, which contained numerous images and videos of young girls aged between 11 and 15 years old. The evidence was damning and formed the basis of the charges against him.
At the time of his arrest, Gifford was employed at Ozmo Devices, located in Bartholomew’s Walk, Ely. He was reported to have since moved to Basingstoke, where he lived with his wife and son. His case was heard at Cambridge Magistrates’ Court, where the prosecution outlined the disturbing nature of his offenses.
In his defense, Chris Casey, representing Gifford, acknowledged that his client was suffering from an obsession that required intervention. Casey stated, “Mr Gifford feels shame, guilt and disgust. He wants to deal with this problem he has. He understands offences like his are generating a demand for such images.”
Ultimately, the court sentenced Gifford to six months in prison, though this sentence was suspended for two years. Additionally, he was placed under 24 months of supervision and enrolled in a sex offenders’ rehabilitation program. The court also imposed strict restrictions on his future conduct: he is prohibited from contacting anyone under the age of 16 unless supervised, and his internet access is limited to work-related use or with explicit police permission. Furthermore, Gifford is required to register as a sex offender for a period of seven years, reflecting the seriousness of his crimes.
Gifford pleaded guilty to the production of a total of 1,418 photographs, all classified at the lowest level of severity, known as level one. In addition, he acknowledged creating a single image rated at level two. Beyond these images, he also confessed to making four videos classified at level four, which indicates a higher level of severity. These offenses were committed prior to his arrest on May 12, and the evidence against him was substantial.
The case was brought to light through a police operation that originated in Luxembourg. Authorities there had been monitoring an online forum where users shared and viewed illicit images. By tracking IP addresses associated with the forum, Luxembourg police were able to identify Gifford as a suspect. The investigation revealed that he was residing at his then-home on High Ditch D Road in Fen Ditton, Cambridgeshire.
Following this discovery, officers from Cambridgeshire executed a search warrant at Gifford’s residence. During the raid, they seized his computers, which contained numerous images and videos of young girls aged between 11 and 15 years old. The evidence was damning and formed the basis of the charges against him.
At the time of his arrest, Gifford was employed at Ozmo Devices, located in Bartholomew’s Walk, Ely. He was reported to have since moved to Basingstoke, where he lived with his wife and son. His case was heard at Cambridge Magistrates’ Court, where the prosecution outlined the disturbing nature of his offenses.
In his defense, Chris Casey, representing Gifford, acknowledged that his client was suffering from an obsession that required intervention. Casey stated, “Mr Gifford feels shame, guilt and disgust. He wants to deal with this problem he has. He understands offences like his are generating a demand for such images.”
Ultimately, the court sentenced Gifford to six months in prison, though this sentence was suspended for two years. Additionally, he was placed under 24 months of supervision and enrolled in a sex offenders’ rehabilitation program. The court also imposed strict restrictions on his future conduct: he is prohibited from contacting anyone under the age of 16 unless supervised, and his internet access is limited to work-related use or with explicit police permission. Furthermore, Gifford is required to register as a sex offender for a period of seven years, reflecting the seriousness of his crimes.