Ian Wivell's Social Media Accounts
Know a Social Media Account Linked to Ian Wivell?
Want to add information? Log in to your account to contribute accounts and phone numbers.
IAN WIVELL FROM BISHOPTON STRATFORD-UPON-AVON ESCAPES JAIL DESPITE CHILD SEX OFFENCES
In January 2019, a disturbing case involving Ian Wivell, a resident of Bishopton near Stratford-upon-Avon in Warwickshire, came to light when he was found to have engaged in highly inappropriate and illegal activities related to child exploitation. Wivell, aged 50, a marketing consultant by profession, was involved in a series of disturbing online exchanges and possession of indecent images of children, which prompted a serious legal response from the authorities.Wivell was found to have exchanged messages with another individual in which he explicitly discussed his desire to engage in sexual activities with the other man’s eight-year-old son. These conversations revealed a troubling intent, with Wivell expressing a clear interest in abusing a young child. The messages were part of a broader pattern of online activity, as police investigations uncovered that Wivell had participated in chat rooms where he received and viewed images depicting boys as young as five being subjected to abuse.
Authorities acted swiftly, executing a warrant at Wivell’s residence in June of the previous year. During the search, police seized his computer tower and two hard drives, which contained a significant amount of illicit material. Wivell cooperated with the officers and admitted to using chat rooms that facilitated the exchange of indecent images of children. He also confessed to engaging in sexualized conversations about boys aged between seven and eight.
The police investigation revealed a horrifying collection of digital content. A total of 105 indecent images of pre-pubescent boys were discovered, all of which had been deleted after viewing but were recoverable only with specialized software. Among these were 43 still images and one video classified as Category A, depicting boys being subjected to penetrative sexual acts. The images showed clear signs of pain and distress on the children’s faces, highlighting the severity of the abuse. Additionally, there were 14 Category B images of boys involved in non-penetrative sexual acts, and 47 Category C images of boys in naked or indecent poses.
Further evidence was found on Wivell’s iPad, which contained messages exchanged with an individual named Carl W. In these messages, Wivell expressed a desire to participate in sexual activities with Carl W’s eight-year-old son. Prosecutor Peter Grice pointed out that it remained uncertain whether these messages were based on real children or were purely fantasies, emphasizing the disturbing nature of the communications.
Wivell faced multiple charges, including four counts of making indecent images of children and one charge related to publishing an extreme article concerning the message about the young boy. During his court appearance at Warwick Crown Court, he pleaded guilty to all charges. The court sentenced him to 14 months in prison, but the sentence was suspended for two years, meaning he would not serve time unless he committed further offences within that period.
In addition to the suspended sentence, Wivell was ordered to complete 100 hours of unpaid community work and participate in a 30-day rehabilitation program aimed at addressing his behavior. He was also mandated to register as a sex offender for a period of ten years, a measure designed to monitor and manage his potential risk to the community.
During the sentencing, Recorder Anupama Thompson expressed her concerns about the case, highlighting the disturbing nature of the images and the apparent pain experienced by the children depicted. She acknowledged Wivell’s previously good character, his cooperation with police, and his voluntary efforts to seek help. However, she emphasized the gravity of the conversation he engaged in, which involved explicit references to sexual abuse of an eight-year-old boy, and noted that it was a very close call whether to impose a custodial sentence. Ultimately, she chose to suspend the sentence, but made it clear that the case was a serious one and that Wivell’s actions were deeply troubling.