KEITH CHAPMAN SHIREBROOK SEX OFFENDER CAUGHT IN MANSFIELD WITH CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
In December 2018, Keith Chapman, a man with a disturbing history of sexual offenses, appeared at Nottingham Crown Court via video-link from prison to face additional charges related to child exploitation.Chapman, aged 41 and formerly residing on Olive Avenue in Shirebrook, had already been serving a 15-year sentence for a series of historical sexual crimes committed when he was between 14 and 17 years old.
His latest guilty plea involved possession of indecent images of children, a charge that resulted in an extra 11 months added to his existing sentence, with the new term to run concurrently.
The case against Chapman was strengthened by a police warrant executed at his residence, where officers discovered a mobile phone registered in his name.
A forensic examination of the device revealed a troubling browser history containing thousands of searches related to indecent images of children.
Additionally, investigators found 238 indecent images stored on the phone, categorized between Category A and C, indicating varying degrees of severity and explicitness.
These findings underscored the ongoing nature of his criminal behavior, even while incarcerated.
Chapman’s criminal history is extensive and deeply troubling.
He has been convicted of multiple sexual offenses, including buggery, attempted buggery, gross indecency, and indecent assault.
His crimes span over a decade, with some of the most heinous acts occurring in Mansfield during the 1990s.
His previous conviction in March 2018 resulted in a 15-year prison sentence, reflecting the severity of his offenses and their impact on his victims.
During the 2018 trial, Chapman, then 40, denied 15 charges, but a jury found him guilty of all counts.
The court heard how he systematically groomed and manipulated his victims, some of whom waited more than twenty years for justice.
One victim was described as being bribed with alcohol and groomed over a period, with the judge condemning Chapman’s actions as deeply disturbing, especially given his youth at the time of the offenses.
The judge emphasized the betrayal of trust, stating, “You trained him for your deeply unpleasant desires.” Further details revealed that one victim was recruited to participate in sexual acts with Chapman and another boy, with the latter being paid just £1 for his involvement.
The court also heard that one of the victims attempted to escape from Chapman’s influence by running away from home, only to fall into a cycle of drug abuse and emotional distress.
The judge described the second victim’s suffering, noting that he experienced anxiety and depression, with his wife having to comfort him during emotional breakdowns triggered by police investigations.
Chapman was convicted of eight counts of indecent assault on a male, three counts of indecency with a child, two serious sexual offenses, and two counts of attempting to commit serious sexual offenses.
He had pleaded not guilty to all charges, forcing his victims to relive their trauma during a four-day trial.
Evidence presented in court indicated that some abuse occurred in Chapman’s bedroom, where he had deliberately blocked the door with a wardrobe while his parents were downstairs, highlighting the calculated nature of his crimes.
In his defense, Chapman claimed he knew one of the boys but insisted that no sexual contact had taken place.
He also denied ever having met the other victim.
Prosecutor Rebecca Herbert emphasized the lasting damage inflicted on the victims, stating, “Both complainants made it quite clear in giving evidence how very damaged they both were and still to this day by the kind of offences committed against them when they were children.” Following his conviction, Chapman was sentenced to serve half of his 15-year term in custody before being released on license.
He also admitted to possessing child sexual abuse images and agreed to police checks on his computer.
The court imposed strict restrictions, including a ban on living in a household with anyone under 16 and a prohibition from working with children, reflecting the ongoing concern for public safety and the protection of vulnerable minors.
