FRANCIS HANCOCK CAUGHT IN INDIAN QUEENS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY SCANDAL

In June 2009, a man residing at a family-oriented attraction and children's park in Indian Queens, Mid-Cornwall, narrowly avoided imprisonment after admitting to serious charges related to child pornography. Francis Hancock, aged 50, who makes his home at the Gnome World park—a popular family visitor destination—pleaded guilty to multiple counts involving indecent images of children.

Hancock's arrest and subsequent investigation revealed disturbing details. The authorities uncovered his illicit activities when a technician, performing routine maintenance on his computer, discovered evidence of child pornography stored on his hard drive. This discovery led to Hancock's arrest and a series of legal proceedings. The images found on his device were classified as highly serious, with many graded at level four on a scale from one to five, where five indicates the most severe content.

During the sentencing hearing at Truro Crown Court, Judge Christopher Elwen addressed the court, emphasizing that Hancock's offenses were primarily facilitated by his access to the Internet. The judge explained that Hancock believed he had deleted the images, but traces remained on his hard drive, which the technician found during the repair process. The judge clarified that Hancock's actions did not suggest he was actively building a library of such images or sharing them with others, but the presence of these images was nonetheless a grave concern.

Judge Elwen remarked, “When we press the delete button and think it’s gone, it hasn’t necessarily—it is stored away.” He also noted that the mere act of deleting files does not fully erase them from a computer’s storage.

Prosecutor Ron Ede provided further context, revealing that Hancock was arrested on July 1 of the previous year at his residence within Gnome World, a location that is effectively a holiday complex frequently visited by children. This setting heightened concerns about the nature of the images and Hancock’s potential access to young visitors. Ede disclosed that Hancock had confessed to having a sexual interest in girls aged 13 to 14 and admitted to using specific search terms such as “Lolita” and “pre-teen porn” during his online activities.

In his defense, lawyer Michael Gregson explained that Hancock’s possession of certain images was considered “creation” because downloading images onto a computer constitutes a form of creation under the law. Gregson emphasized that there was no evidence suggesting Hancock had engaged in any contact offenses involving minors and highlighted that Hancock had made full admissions at the earliest opportunity.

Although the prosecution requested a sexual offences prevention order, the court did not grant this request. Instead, Hancock was sentenced to a three-year community order, which includes supervision. He was also ordered to pay costs of £250, register as a sex offender for five years, and participate in an Internet sex offender program.

Following the hearing, Detective Constable Steve Rome from the child exploitation team at Devon and Cornwall Police stated, “If people use the Internet to satisfy their sexual interest in children, then they will be caught. There are so many mechanisms in place to catch people, and in this case, it was down to the vigilance of the technician.” This case underscores the ongoing efforts by law enforcement to combat online child exploitation and the importance of vigilance in identifying offenders.