PAUL RICHARDSON INVERGORDON SEX OFFENDER BREACHES COURT ORDER AFTER DOWNLOADING ADULT PORN ON SMARTPHONE

In a case heard at Tain Sheriff Court, Paul Richardson, a resident of Clyde Street in Invergordon, faced serious allegations related to his previous conviction for child pornography. Richardson, who was convicted in 2009 at Caernarvon Crown Court and subsequently placed on the Sex Offenders Register, was found to have violated the strict court orders designed to restrict his access to pornography.

According to the court proceedings, Richardson was subject to a court order under the Sex Offenders Act 2003, which explicitly prohibited him from accessing, downloading, or viewing any pornographic material via the internet. This order was intended to prevent any further offenses or misconduct related to his previous conviction. However, during a police visit to his home on March 17, officers conducted checks on his mobile device as part of routine monitoring.

Depute Fiscal Roderick Urquhart informed Sheriff Jamie Gilchrist that during the examination of Richardson’s mobile phone, officers discovered multiple images of adult pornography. The fiscal emphasized that these images were not of a similar nature to the child pornography for which Richardson had been previously convicted. Instead, the images found were of consenting adults, and Richardson himself admitted to downloading them.

At the time of the hearing, Richardson, aged 36, acknowledged the police findings. The court had deferred sentencing until the following Monday to allow for the preparation of criminal justice social work reports, which would inform the final decision.

Richardson’s solicitor, Alison Foggo, argued that the social work reports indicated there was no need for additional supervision beyond what was already in place. She clarified that the original court order, imposed five years earlier, explicitly prohibited Richardson from accessing any form of pornography on the internet. However, Ms. Foggo pointed out that the order did not extend to the use of adult videos, DVDs, or magazines available from newsagents, suggesting that the act of downloading adult images on his smartphone might constitute a technical breach rather than a deliberate violation.

Ms. Foggo also mentioned that there could be grounds to review the existing order, given the circumstances. She stressed Richardson’s willingness to comply with the restrictions and noted that police officers had shown a degree of understanding when he handed over his phone. She described Richardson as “committed” to adhering to the court’s conditions and expressed hope for a community-based disposal, considering his unemployment status.

In response, Sheriff Gilchrist emphasized the seriousness of breaching such court orders. After considering the case, he sentenced Richardson to 50 hours of community service, underscoring the importance of respecting court-imposed restrictions and the potential consequences of violations.