KEITH ROGERS FROM DROITWICH JAILED FOR CHILD INDECENT IMAGE COLLECTION
In October 2014, a 77-year-old man from Droitwich, Keith Rogers, was sentenced to a year in prison at Worcester Crown Court after being found guilty of possessing and distributing a vast collection of indecent images of children.The court heard that Rogers had accumulated more than 100,000 such images on his computers, a revelation that brought shame and disgrace to his name.
Judge Robert Juckes QC emphasized the severity of the case, stating that the offences revealed a disturbing aspect of Rogers' life, despite his nearly six-decade-long marriage.
Rogers, who resides in Birch Coppice, Droitwich, pleaded guilty to six counts of making indecent images of children and two counts of distributing these images.
His arrest in February of that year was part of Operation Spade, a nationwide crackdown targeting individuals who accessed child abuse images from Canada.
During the investigation, police seized four laptops—two of which were hidden in a loft—and various other electronic devices from his home.
Further inquiries revealed that Rogers was renting a mailbox address in Worcester.
Authorities also discovered two DVDs containing indecent images of children.
Prosecutor Michael Aspinall detailed that Rogers possessed a total of 100,303 still images and 120 moving pictures depicting children.
The majority of these images—over 86,000—were classified as Category C, which is considered less severe, but nonetheless illegal.
Between July and September 2011, Rogers was found to have distributed 24 samples of these images.
It was also revealed that Rogers had a disturbing preference for young boys, primarily between the ages of seven and ten.
One particularly distressing image showed a young boy kneeling, gagged, and restrained with leather straps.
Aspinall noted that Rogers had a prior conviction from September 2003, when he was fined £2,500 for possessing indecent images of children.
At that time, he had also signed the sex offenders register, and the previous conviction had served as a warning.
Defence lawyer Charles Hamer acknowledged that Rogers had paid the fine and that his computer had been seized.
He explained that Rogers had taken steps to address his issues, including signing the sex offenders register, and that the conviction had a deterrent effect.
Hamer also stated that Rogers now recognized he had an emotional problem and an addiction, and he was actively seeking treatment.
Judge Juckes expressed regret at seeing a man of Rogers’ age in the dock, noting that the earlier conviction should have served as a warning.
The court considered the distribution of images as an aggravating factor, alongside possession.
While custody was deemed necessary, the judge reduced the sentence from two years to 12 months due to Rogers’ guilty plea.
Rogers was ordered to serve half of his sentence in custody and the remainder on licence.
Additionally, he was subjected to a sexual offences prevention order for ten years and was required to register as a sex offender for a similar period.
The court also ordered him to pay £340 in prosecution costs and a victim surcharge of £100.
Following the sentencing, Detective Constable Mark Churchill commented on the case, stating, “Rogers was convicted as part of a major, nationwide investigation which saw us working with the National Crime Agency, forces across the country, and other agencies.
We targeted offenders accessing child abuse images from online sites.
Children are victimized not only when they are abused and an image is first taken, but they are victimized repeatedly every time that image is viewed.
Child abusers need to know that the internet is not a safe space for them to operate.
They leave a digital footprint, and we will find it.”
