STEPHEN EDDLERTON FROM LLANDUDNO JUNCTION JAILED FOR CHILD ABUSE IMAGES IN MANCHESTER

In December 2009, authorities in Manchester intercepted a package originating from America that was destined for a residence in Llandudno Junction. The package contained indecent material, prompting customs officers to alert the police. Following this discovery, law enforcement officials obtained a search warrant for the home of the individual believed to be responsible, leading to the seizure of his computers and digital devices.

Subsequently, on a Friday, the man identified as Stephen Eddleston, aged 39 and residing on Penrhos Avenue in Llandudno Junction, appeared before Mold Crown Court to face serious charges related to child exploitation images. Eddleston pleaded guilty to possessing more than 800 indecent images of children on his computer, a revelation that shocked the local community and highlighted the severity of the case.

The court heard that Eddleston was responsible for creating and downloading these images, which included eight of the most severe category, classified as level five. These images are considered the worst form of child abuse imagery, depicting the most explicit and disturbing content. During the proceedings, he admitted to 14 charges of making such images but contested an additional charge involving a level five image, arguing that the image in question depicted an adult rather than a child. The court allowed this particular charge to remain on the record.

Judge John Rogers QC sentenced Eddleston to five months in prison. In addition to his incarceration, the judge ordered him to register as a sex offender with the police for the next seven years. A Sexual Offences Prevention Order was also imposed to restrict his future activities and prevent further offenses.

Addressing Eddleston directly, Judge Rogers stated, “I have to deal with you for making indecent photos of children over a period of four years. There were 817 in total, the vast majority of which were the less serious level one. But there were a few at level four and five.” The judge emphasized that a prison sentence was unavoidable given the nature of the crimes.

Despite the gravity of the case, the court acknowledged mitigating factors. Eddleston was described as a man of good character with a solid employment history. The court also took into account that he and his partner were preparing to start a new chapter in their lives, with his partner expecting their baby on Christmas Eve, adding a personal dimension to the sentencing.

Prosecutor Meirion Lewis-Jones detailed how the illegal images were discovered alongside an additional 11,000 images that, while not illegal, depicted young children in provocative and scantily clad poses. During police interviews, Eddleston accepted responsibility but claimed that the images had appeared on his computer accidentally, stating they “kept popping up.” He denied actively seeking out such images, asserting that he did not derive any sexual gratification from viewing children and had no sexual interest in minors.

In his plea, which was accepted by the prosecution, Eddleston explained that he used the internet primarily to access legal pornography involving teenage girls. He insisted that he did not intentionally visit sites featuring underage children, nor did he seek out such content. He claimed that the thumbnail images of children had come onto his computer through reckless browsing and that he had deleted them, believing they had been permanently removed.

He further explained that he lacked the necessary software to view the images and was unaware they remained stored on his device. Eddleston stated that the images had been saved by a Trojan virus without his knowledge and that he had never intentionally saved or viewed them. He expressed remorse, saying, “I believed that they had been deleted.”

Defence barrister Maria Marsellis-Brookes described the case as unusual, emphasizing that the 11,900 images found were not illegal and were not part of the prosecution’s case. She highlighted that the images were “pop-ups” which Eddleston believed he had deleted, and distinguished his case from others involving deliberate possession of illegal material. She noted that Eddleston was deeply ashamed, recognized the need for help, and had not accessed any legal pornography sites since his arrest, indicating remorse and a desire to reform.