Russell Morgan's Social Media Accounts
Know a Social Media Account Linked to Russell Morgan?
Want to add information? Log in to your account to contribute accounts and phone numbers.
RUSSELL MORGAN FROM CHIPPENHAM JAILED FOR CHILD INDECENT IMAGES IN NORTH WALES
In a case that has sent shockwaves through the community of Chippenham, IT manager Russell Morgan has been sentenced to 16 months in prison for his involvement in the distribution and possession of indecent images of children. The 57-year-old, who resides on Curlew Drive in Chippenham, was found guilty of engaging in disturbing online activities that involved sharing vile material with like-minded individuals over the internet.According to court proceedings, Morgan’s criminal activities came to light after police in North Wales initiated an investigation into a man suspected of child sex abuse. During their inquiries, authorities discovered that Morgan had been corresponding with a computer registered to his name. Online chat logs revealed that the conversations included discussions about images of children and activities involving them, which further implicated him in the case.
Following these revelations, law enforcement officers executed a search warrant at Morgan’s residence. During the raid, they seized multiple computers and storage devices. The police investigation uncovered a disturbing collection of 523 indecent images of children stored on Morgan’s devices. In addition to the images, officers found extensive chat logs on Google Hello, where Morgan discussed paedophilia and child abuse openly.
The investigation also revealed that Morgan had, on three separate occasions in 2006, sent packages containing images of child abuse to three different individuals he had been communicating with online. The first package included four low-level images, while subsequent deliveries included collections of 28 images, some classified in the most severe categories of abuse. These actions demonstrated a pattern of ongoing distribution of such material.
Further examination of Morgan’s online activity showed that he had used search engines to look for more images of child abuse, employing vile and explicit terms. When questioned by police, Morgan initially denied any knowledge of Google Hello, but he later admitted that the material found on his computers was indeed placed there by him.
During the court hearing at Swindon Crown Court, Morgan pleaded guilty to multiple charges, including three counts of distribution, five counts of making indecent images, and one count of possession of such images. His defense attorney, Alex Daymond, argued that the number of images recovered was not as high as those typically seen in similar cases, emphasizing that Morgan was a 'regular but infrequent viewer' of such material over a prolonged period.
Mr. Daymond also suggested that Morgan’s continued liberty would allow him to participate in a sex offenders’ program, which could be more beneficial for society and his rehabilitation. He highlighted that this was Morgan’s first encounter with the law and noted that Morgan had not informed his employers about his situation, believing he might retain his job if not jailed.
However, Judge Euan Ambrose delivered a stern sentence, emphasizing the gravity of the charges. He stated, “These distribution charges, especially of the level four and five images, are the most serious before the court. They involved the circulation of images depicting real children suffering real sexual abuse. This is not a victimless crime; it involves the possession and distribution of images of actual children being abused. While you were not the abuser, your activities and those of others who behave similarly encourage the abuse of children.”
In addition to the prison term, Morgan was subjected to a Sexual Offense Prevention Order, which restricts his liberty and prevents him from working with children. He is also required to register as a sex offender for the next ten years, and his name will be added to the barred list, prohibiting him from employment in roles involving children. The case underscores the ongoing efforts of law enforcement to combat online child exploitation and the serious consequences faced by those involved in such heinous activities.