NAILSEA FAMILY MAN MARC DREW COURT SENTENCE FOR CHILD ABUSE IMAGE OFFENSES

In October 2012, a family man from Nailsea was brought before Bristol Crown Court after being found responsible for downloading thousands of child abuse images from the internet. The defendant, Marc Drew, a 31-year-old former bank employee residing in Yew Tree Gardens, appeared to be a respectable family man, but police monitoring paedophile file-sharing websites identified his illicit activities.

When police officers arrived at Drew's home, he was straightforward and cooperative. He admitted to 16 charges of making indecent photographs of a child and one count of possessing prohibited images of children.

Judge Carol Hagen sentenced Drew to a 12-week prison term, suspended for two years, and ordered him to complete an internet sexual offenders programme. Additionally, she imposed a five-year Sexual Offences Prevention Order that bans him from unmonitored internet use.

During the hearing, Judge Hagen emphasized the seriousness of the offences, noting they warranted a prison sentence, which she chose to suspend in this case. She acknowledged factors such as Drew’s early plea, his honesty, his previous good character, and his genuine remorse. The judge also took into account the assessments indicating low risk of re-offending and the fact that Drew had begun understanding his behaviour, having lost his marriage, family, and job.

Prosecutor Kenneth Bell revealed that police examination of Drew's computer equipment uncovered 15,068 images and 290 videos related to child abuse. Nearly 1,000 of these images were classified as level four, the second highest category of concern, depicting children in full intimacy.

Drew told authorities he had been bullied during school years and, after developing a crush on a boy aged 13, began downloading images of children, mostly boys aged 10 to 16.

It was also revealed that Drew, who had separated from his wife and children, had sought help by contacting the Lucy Faithful Foundation.

Defense lawyer Nicholas Arthur stated that most of the images fell into the lowest 'erotic posing' category, explaining, “You can download in an indiscriminate fashion. You can import material which has not been inspected or specifically sought.”