Stephen Tippit's Social Media Accounts
Know a Social Media Account Linked to Stephen Tippit?
Want to add information? Log in to your account to contribute accounts and phone numbers.
CONNAH'S QUAY MAN STEPHEN TIPPIT SENTENCED FOR GROOMING GIRLS WHILE PRETENDING TO BE A TEENAGE BOY
In June 2016, a disturbing case emerged involving a man from Connah's Quay who engaged in manipulative and predatory behavior online. Stephen Giles Tippit, a warehouse worker residing on Uplands Avenue in Connah's Quay, was found guilty of grooming young girls by falsely presenting himself as a 14-year-old boy. His actions included inviting girls to participate in sexual acts, exploiting their naivety and trust.At Mold Crown Court, Tippit was sentenced to four years in prison for his crimes. The court also ordered him to register as a sex offender for life, emphasizing the severity of his offenses. Additionally, an indefinite sexual harm prevention order was imposed to restrict his future interactions and protect potential victims.
Tippit admitted to two charges: inciting an 11-year-old girl and a 14-year-old girl to engage in sexual activity, as well as possessing three indecent images of children. The police investigation revealed that Tippit’s computer equipment contained five indecent images of children, categorized as B and C, though none fell into the most serious category A. The more serious aspect of his misconduct involved inciting children to engage in sexual acts over the internet.
During the court proceedings, Judge Geraint Walters highlighted the disturbing nature of Tippit’s actions, noting that such offenses are all too familiar in today’s society. The judge detailed how Tippit had used online platforms to communicate with young girls, pretending to be a teenage boy. In one case, he targeted an 11-year-old girl, attempting to groom her by exchanging messages that included requests for indecent photographs of herself. The judge read the messages, describing how Tippit effectively groomed her to comply with his demands, although she did not send explicit images.
In another instance, a 14-year-old girl from abroad sent Tippit a photograph of herself engaged in a sexual act after he had convinced her to do so. The court was told that Tippit’s behavior was part of a broader pattern of exploiting vulnerable young girls online. Judge Walters emphasized that such offenses are taken very seriously by the courts, especially when adult men like Tippit use deception to manipulate impressionable minors into sexual activities or sharing explicit images.
Prosecutor Simon Rogers explained that police in Leicester had received information about an Instagram profile named 'Thai Boy 08,' which claimed to be a 14-year-old boy. Investigations revealed that Tippit was behind this profile. He had asked an 11-year-old girl for naked pictures; although she declined, she sent a picture of her stomach. Tippit had also made inappropriate remarks, including threatening to pin her against a wall and kiss her, and he attempted to arrange a meeting with her.
In February 2015, police executed a search warrant at Tippit’s home, uncovering five indecent images of children. During police interviews, Tippit claimed he suffered from depression and used Instagram to connect with others experiencing similar issues. He admitted that he found it comforting to talk to others but also revealed that he began speaking to young girls, including a 14-year-old girl from abroad who had been a victim of sexual abuse. Tippit admitted that he started to indulge in fantasies where he pretended to be a young male while communicating with schoolgirls.
He confessed to finding images of young girls sexually gratifying and expressed enjoyment in having control and dominance over them. Tippit also stated that he found girls aged 11 to 15 sexually attractive when speaking to them and viewing related images. However, he claimed to have stopped his activities by allowing his computer’s battery to run out and placing it back in its box, acknowledging that what he was doing was wrong.
Overall, the case underscores the dangers of online grooming and the importance of vigilance in protecting vulnerable minors from exploitation and abuse, especially in an era where digital deception can have serious real-world consequences.