PAEDOPHILE PAUL RUDD FROM BROUGHTY FERRY SENTENCED IN DUNDEE FOR CHILD ABUSE IMAGES

In a serious case that has shocked the community of Broughty Ferry, Dundee, Paul Rudd, a 62-year-old resident of Broadford Terrace, was sentenced to prison after being found guilty of possessing a significant number of indecent images of children. The incident came to light in May 2018 when police uncovered that Rudd had been engaged in illegal online activities involving child abuse images at his home address in Broughty Ferry.

Despite Rudd’s efforts to conceal his digital footprint, he employed specialized software designed to erase files and encrypt data, making it difficult for investigators to recover evidence. Authorities had received intelligence indicating that Rudd had downloaded and stored numerous child abuse images on his computer. An investigation revealed that he had downloaded a total of 2,320 images, of which 98 were classified as Category A, indicating the most severe form of child exploitation material. However, due to the encryption and file deletion techniques used by Rudd, none of these images could be recovered by the police cybercrime experts.

During the court proceedings at Dundee Sheriff Court, Rudd pleaded guilty to charges that, between October 18, 2015, and June 1, 2017, he either took or allowed to be taken indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children at his residence on Broadford Terrace. The prosecution detailed how Rudd had actively attempted to hide his activities through the use of encryption and file cleaning software, which he used to delete files and encrypt data, making it inaccessible to investigators.

His defense solicitor, Ian Myles, addressed the court, emphasizing Rudd’s cooperation with police following the discovery of his digital stash. Myles stated that Rudd was a first-time offender who had been forthcoming with authorities and was determined to avoid a lengthy trial. He highlighted that a report indicated Rudd could benefit from treatment and that he understood the gravity of his actions, which warranted a custodial sentence. Nonetheless, the defense argued that Rudd’s use of cleaning software was primarily for routine computer maintenance, aimed at freeing up memory, and not specifically for hiding illegal content. Myles insisted that Rudd had deleted various non-essential files from his computer, and this case was not among the worst of its kind.

In his sentencing remarks, Sheriff Alastair Carmichael condemned Rudd’s actions, noting the level of sophistication involved in his attempts to conceal the illegal material. The sheriff pointed out that Rudd had engaged in these activities over a period of approximately 20 months, during which he encrypted files and deleted information to hinder police investigations. Recognizing the seriousness of the offense, Sheriff Carmichael sentenced Rudd to 10 months in prison, ordered him to be placed on the sex offenders register for a decade, and mandated the forfeiture of his computer equipment. The sheriff concluded by stating that only a custodial sentence was appropriate given the nature and duration of Rudd’s offending, emphasizing the importance of protecting children and maintaining public trust in the justice system.