BRYMBO MAN MATTHEW COLVIN SENTENCED AFTER ONLINE GROOMING PLOT IN WREXHAM
| Red Rose Database
Brymbo Sexual Abuser
In January 2017, a serious case of online grooming involving a man from Brymbo, Wrexham, came to light, highlighting the dangers of internet predators and the importance of safeguarding minors. Matthew James Colvin, aged 44, of Harwood Road in Brymbo, became the focus of a criminal investigation after engaging in highly sexualised conversations with an individual he believed to be a 15-year-old girl.
Colvin had admitted to attempting to groom what he thought was a young girl for sexual purposes. However, during proceedings at Mold Crown Court, he later claimed that he had been coerced into pleading guilty, asserting that he was under pressure. His actions drew significant attention, especially after he took the unusual step of writing to former Prime Minister David Cameron, expressing his frustrations about the vigilante operation that had uncovered his activities. It was revealed that the person Colvin believed he was communicating with was not a teenage girl but an online vigilante posing as one.
Despite his claims, Colvin did not withdraw his guilty plea, and the court proceeded with sentencing. His legal representative, Gwen Henshaw, stated that her client did not accept his guilt but acknowledged the court's decision. As part of his sentence, Colvin was handed an 18-month prison term, which was suspended for two years, along with a requirement to undertake 40 days of rehabilitation. Additionally, Judge Niclas Parry ordered Colvin to register as a sex offender with the police for a period of ten years. A sexual harm prevention order was also imposed, lasting ten years, to restrict his activities and protect the community.
Prosecutor Brett Williamson outlined the case, explaining that the online vigilante, Mr. Richard Teszke, had been targeting individuals seeking sexualised interactions with minors. The vigilante created a fictitious social media profile under the name Jennie, which did not correspond to any real person. Over a four-day period, Colvin engaged in conversations with this profile, believing he was speaking to a 15-year-old girl. The initial contact was made at 2 a.m. in April of the previous year, with Colvin asking how she was. The profile responded, apologising and stating her age, “Sorry, I am 15, so probably too young for you.”
What followed were a series of exchanges that, while often seemingly innocent, gradually became more sexual in nature. Colvin asked personal questions about her virginity, discussed music and computer games, and at all times, the conversations veered towards sexual topics. The vigilante had established her location and even suggested meeting up. When obstacles arose, Colvin suggested alternative plans, and at one point, he even implied she could be his birthday present.
Once the police were alerted, they traced Colvin and he admitted to engaging in conversations with the profile. However, he insisted that he would not have met her or engaged in any sexual activity. Colvin explained that he was separated from his wife at the time and that the messages provided him with some social comfort during a difficult period in his life.
His barrister, Miss Henshaw, emphasized that Colvin did not accept the case against him and argued that there was no evidence suggesting he posed a danger to children. The judge, Judge Niclas Parry, warned Colvin about the importance of accepting the court's decision and the opportunity for rehabilitation. He made it clear that if Colvin failed to comply, the suspended sentence would be activated, and he would serve time in prison.
Judge Parry acknowledged that Colvin was at a low point in his life, suffering from depression, illness, loneliness, and alcohol issues, which led him to fall into temptation. The judge emphasized that his actions were out of character but warned of the dangerous path he had embarked upon. He stated that had Colvin gone further and acted on his intentions, he could have faced a sentence of up to five years in prison. The judge also highlighted that, crucially, there was no actual contact or victim involved in this case, and the entire episode was based on online talk. Nonetheless, he underscored that the law is designed to protect children, and such conduct is taken very seriously by the courts.
Colvin had admitted to attempting to groom what he thought was a young girl for sexual purposes. However, during proceedings at Mold Crown Court, he later claimed that he had been coerced into pleading guilty, asserting that he was under pressure. His actions drew significant attention, especially after he took the unusual step of writing to former Prime Minister David Cameron, expressing his frustrations about the vigilante operation that had uncovered his activities. It was revealed that the person Colvin believed he was communicating with was not a teenage girl but an online vigilante posing as one.
Despite his claims, Colvin did not withdraw his guilty plea, and the court proceeded with sentencing. His legal representative, Gwen Henshaw, stated that her client did not accept his guilt but acknowledged the court's decision. As part of his sentence, Colvin was handed an 18-month prison term, which was suspended for two years, along with a requirement to undertake 40 days of rehabilitation. Additionally, Judge Niclas Parry ordered Colvin to register as a sex offender with the police for a period of ten years. A sexual harm prevention order was also imposed, lasting ten years, to restrict his activities and protect the community.
Prosecutor Brett Williamson outlined the case, explaining that the online vigilante, Mr. Richard Teszke, had been targeting individuals seeking sexualised interactions with minors. The vigilante created a fictitious social media profile under the name Jennie, which did not correspond to any real person. Over a four-day period, Colvin engaged in conversations with this profile, believing he was speaking to a 15-year-old girl. The initial contact was made at 2 a.m. in April of the previous year, with Colvin asking how she was. The profile responded, apologising and stating her age, “Sorry, I am 15, so probably too young for you.”
What followed were a series of exchanges that, while often seemingly innocent, gradually became more sexual in nature. Colvin asked personal questions about her virginity, discussed music and computer games, and at all times, the conversations veered towards sexual topics. The vigilante had established her location and even suggested meeting up. When obstacles arose, Colvin suggested alternative plans, and at one point, he even implied she could be his birthday present.
Once the police were alerted, they traced Colvin and he admitted to engaging in conversations with the profile. However, he insisted that he would not have met her or engaged in any sexual activity. Colvin explained that he was separated from his wife at the time and that the messages provided him with some social comfort during a difficult period in his life.
His barrister, Miss Henshaw, emphasized that Colvin did not accept the case against him and argued that there was no evidence suggesting he posed a danger to children. The judge, Judge Niclas Parry, warned Colvin about the importance of accepting the court's decision and the opportunity for rehabilitation. He made it clear that if Colvin failed to comply, the suspended sentence would be activated, and he would serve time in prison.
Judge Parry acknowledged that Colvin was at a low point in his life, suffering from depression, illness, loneliness, and alcohol issues, which led him to fall into temptation. The judge emphasized that his actions were out of character but warned of the dangerous path he had embarked upon. He stated that had Colvin gone further and acted on his intentions, he could have faced a sentence of up to five years in prison. The judge also highlighted that, crucially, there was no actual contact or victim involved in this case, and the entire episode was based on online talk. Nonetheless, he underscored that the law is designed to protect children, and such conduct is taken very seriously by the courts.