SIMON “DES” GAZE FROM GLOUCESTER SENTENCED FOR POSSESSING OVER 4200 CHILD INDECENT IMAGES

In a case that has shocked the community of Gloucester, a 50-year-old man named Simon “Des” Gaze has been found in possession of an alarming number of indecent images of children. Authorities discovered more than 4,200 such images stored on his personal computers, raising serious concerns about the extent of his offending and the potential threat to vulnerable children.

During the investigation, police officers visited Gaze’s residence on Elmbridge Road to carry out inquiries related to the illicit material. Demonstrating a degree of transparency, Gaze voluntarily provided his computer password and was forthcoming with officers about his actions. This candidness was noted by the prosecution as unusual for someone involved in this type of offense.

At Gloucester Crown Court, Julian Kesner, the prosecutor, detailed that the majority of the images found on two storage devices belonged to the least severe category, Category 1. However, the investigation also uncovered other images and video clips that ranged from Category 2 to the most serious Category 5, indicating a disturbing spectrum of material involving child exploitation.

Gaze pleaded guilty to 10 charges of making indecent images of children on August 8 of the previous year. His defense attorney, Paul Cook, highlighted that Gaze had “held his hands up to police,” describing his cooperation as “remarkable for this kind of offending.” Mr. Cook emphasized that Gaze showed no signs of resistance or denial and that he had sought help for his issues, expressing a desire to rehabilitate himself from what he described as an addiction.

According to Mr. Cook, Gaze had endured significant personal hardships, including financial difficulties from 2008 to 2010. During this period, he was made redundant and faced imminent repossession of his home, which was only narrowly avoided. These circumstances contributed to his depression, which his defense argued was a factor in his offending.

The judge, William Hart, acknowledged the seriousness of the images, which depicted child abuse, and recognized the public’s justified concern about such offenses and their potential to lead to further harm. Nonetheless, the judge clarified that there was no evidence suggesting Gaze had any intention of engaging in contact offenses himself.

In sentencing, Judge Hart considered the option of imprisonment but ultimately decided against it. He stated that a 24-week prison term would only result in Gaze serving about half that time—12 weeks—and would not include any form of rehabilitation or treatment. The judge expressed the view that incarceration would be an ordeal for Gaze but would not address the underlying issues driving his behavior.

Instead, Gaze was sentenced to a three-year community order, which includes mandatory participation in the Thames Valley sex offenders programme. He was also placed under three years of supervision and ordered to comply with an indefinite sexual offences prevention order. Additionally, Gaze was registered on the sex offenders’ register for a period of five years, reflecting the gravity of his offenses and the need for ongoing monitoring.