MATTHEW HOWARD FROM CROXLEY GREEN FACES SERIOUS CHARGES AFTER BREACHING SEX OFFENDER ORDER IN HERTFORDSHIRE

In a troubling development in Croxley Green, Hertfordshire, Matthew Howard, a 38-year-old man, has found himself back in legal trouble after allegedly breaching a court-ordered sex offenders' restriction. The case, which has garnered significant attention, stems from Howard's previous conviction and the subsequent monitoring of his compliance with court conditions.

Howard was initially sentenced in January following a police investigation that uncovered a disturbing collection of over 2,750 indecent images of children stored on his personal laptop. The images, which depicted child abuse, were discovered in his residence on New Road, Croxley Green. Further investigations revealed that Howard had been actively sharing these illicit images over the internet, thereby facilitating access to even more such material. This behavior raised serious concerns about his ongoing risk to the community.

During the police raid, authorities also seized hallucinogenic substances, including magic mushrooms, as well as amphetamines and cannabis, indicating a broader pattern of illegal activity. Howard admitted to 15 charges related to the distribution, creation, and possession of indecent images of children, alongside nine drug-related charges. His initial sentencing at St Albans Crown Court was a six-month prison term, suspended for two years, a decision influenced by a probation report that recommended leniency given his circumstances.

As part of his sentence, Howard was mandated to register as a sex offender and was explicitly prohibited from working with children. Additionally, he was barred from owning any electronic devices capable of deleting browsing history, a measure intended to prevent further concealment of illicit activities. The court also ordered him to participate in a sex offenders’ treatment program, with supervision overseen by probation officers for a period of two years. The judge warned that any failure to comply with these conditions could result in Howard serving the original six-month sentence in prison.

Despite these measures, within just two months of the court’s order, the probation service reported that Howard had breached the conditions. Specifically, he failed to attend scheduled appointments on March 3 and March 26, prompting a return to court in April. During this hearing, Howard, who was unrepresented at the time, was given an adjournment to secure legal representation. However, he did not do so, mistakenly believing that a further community order would be issued instead of addressing the breach.

Most recently, Howard appeared in court on a Thursday facing more serious allegations from probation authorities. Prosecutor Eve George stated that Howard had been “disruptive” and demonstrated an “unwillingness to cooperate” with the court-mandated treatment program, specifically the Internet Sex Offenders Treatment Programme. When questioned by Judge John Plumstead about his failure to instruct a solicitor, Howard claimed he did not consider the matter “that serious” and expressed a desire not to “waste the court’s resources.”

Judge Plumstead emphasized the gravity of the situation, replying, “When a Judge tells you to get a lawyer, I can tell you it is serious.” The case continues to unfold as authorities seek to ensure Howard complies fully with the court’s orders and addresses the serious breaches of his previous sentence.