SHARON EDWARDS FROM STOCKTON ESCAPES JAIL AFTER CHILD SEX OFFENSES

In a case that has sparked widespread outrage and condemnation, Sharon Edwards, a housewife residing in Stockton, was handed a lenient sentence after being convicted of engaging in sexual activities with a 14-year-old boy. The incident, which took place in October 2008, has ignited fierce criticism from child protection organizations and the public alike.

Sharon Edwards, aged 40 and a mother of two, appeared before Teesside Crown Court where she was sentenced to a suspended prison term. Despite her legal team acknowledging that she could have faced several years behind bars for her actions, the judge opted for a sentence that included probation supervision rather than immediate incarceration. The court's decision was based on the judge’s view that the teenage boy involved was, in his words, “mature” and had, in some sense, seduced her.

This characterization drew sharp rebukes from prominent child protection charities, including the NSPCC and the Lucy Faithfull Foundation. Diana Sutton, who is the head of policy at the NSPCC, expressed her disapproval, stating, “It is unacceptable to describe the child victim in this case as the seducer. This gives out completely the wrong message – that sex abuse is the fault of the child, when in reality, it never is.”

Similarly, Donald Findlater, the director of research and development at the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, emphasized the inconsistency in judicial treatment, noting, “It is highly likely that in the exact same circumstances, a male child sexual offender engaging in such acts with a female would face an immediate prison sentence.”

During the court proceedings, the judge acknowledged that Edwards had been experiencing unhappiness in her marriage and that she was flattered by the attention from the teenage boy. However, he also emphasized her responsibilities as an adult, stating, “Of course you have responsibilities as an adult to reject his advances.”

The judge further explained that he considered the case to be exceptional and, therefore, chose to suspend the prison sentence. Additionally, Edwards was ordered to register as a sex offender for five years. The court heard that Edwards’ relationship with the boy began as a desperate attempt to salvage her failing marriage, which was deteriorating at the time.

Evidence presented in court revealed that Edwards exchanged up to 50 text messages daily with the boy, who reportedly harbored a crush on her. The scandal was uncovered when her suspicious husband, Mark Edwards, decided to investigate further. He altered the settings on her computer to ensure that chatroom messages shared with the teenager would be saved. When he left for an evening out, Tina Dempster, the prosecutor, explained, Mark checked the computer the following day and discovered the illicit messages, confirming his suspicions of an affair.

Sharon Edwards admitted to four charges of sexual activity with a child and also confessed to offering to supply cocaine, a Class A drug, to the boy. Described as “a sad and lonely housewife,” her defense lawyer, Deborah Sherwin, argued that her circumstances contributed to her actions, stating, “She didn’t work, her parents had moved abroad, and she was stuck at home. Her marriage was failing, and she was unhappy. There are people who come before these courts who are wicked and others who are foolish. As far as Mrs. Edwards is concerned, she very much falls into the latter category.”

Despite the gravity of her crimes, the court’s decision to avoid immediate imprisonment has sparked significant controversy and public debate about justice and the treatment of offenders in similar cases.