JAYME WILLIAMS, NEWBURGH PAEDOPHILE, REARRESTED WITH MORE CHILD ABUSE MATERIAL IN ABERDEEN

 |  Red Rose Database

Newburgh Child Abuser
A well-known paedophile from Newburgh has been re-arrested by police, this time with even more child abuse images on his device, just months after his previous conviction for similar offences.

Jayme Williams, 31, appeared at Aberdeen Sheriff Court where he pleaded guilty to possessing approximately 118 images of children on his phone, many of which were classified as the most severe categories. Williams, who previously worked at a bank, was sentenced last March after police found around 100 images on his device. During police interview, he claimed he did not intentionally download the images nor did he seek them out purposefully.

Regarding the recent offences, Williams' solicitor, Michael Burnett, expressed regret, stating that the conviction has had a devastating impact on his life. "Since his first conviction, his life has come crashing down," Burnett said.

In May of the previous year, police obtained a search warrant after intelligence suggested that child abuse material was being downloaded at Williams’ home. During the search, officers seized a Samsung phone, which was later examined and found to contain 52 Category A images, 30 Category B images, and 36 Category C images, all depicting minors.

This incident followed Williams’ earlier court appearance, where he was required to register as a sex offender for two years. He admitted to downloading child abuse material, and his legal counsel highlighted that these actions took place shortly after his previous conviction.

The court was told that Williams’ actions were deliberate, planned, and intended for his own sexual gratification. Sheriff Lesley Johnstone sentenced him to a community payback order with 300 hours of unpaid work, supervised probation, and a sexual harm prevention order to monitor his electronic device usage. Additionally, Williams was placed on the sex offenders register for three years, with the sheriff noting that his offence occurred while he was under a court-imposed community order.

The sentence was aimed at safeguarding the public and recognizing the seriousness of his offences.
← Back to search results