Dewey vs Rex

This case concerned an appeal on the terms of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) imposed on Thomas Dewey, who was convicted of possessing indecent images of children and extreme pornographic images.

TLDR:

• The appellant was convicted of possessing indecent images of children and extreme pornographic images.
• The appeal focused on the necessity and proportionality of the SHPO terms imposed by the Crown Court.
• The Court of Appeal revised the SHPO, making it more specific and proportionate.

Thomas Dewey pleaded guilty at West London Magistrates' Court to four offences of making or possessing indecent images of children and one offence of possessing extreme pornographic images. He was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, suspended for 2 years, with additional requirements including a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO).

The National Crime Agency reported that Dewey had uploaded indecent images to his online storage. A search of his home revealed numerous indecent images on multiple devices. Dewey was cooperative during the search, providing access to his devices and passwords.

A pre-sentence report indicated Dewey had issues with sexual intimacy and social isolation, which contributed to his offending behavior. He had taken steps to address his behavior, including attending counseling sessions and enrolling in a university course.

During sentencing, the prosecution proposed a draft SHPO, which was not agreed upon by the defense. The court had to decide on the final terms of the SHPO, which included restrictions on contact with children and use of internet-enabled devices.

The appeal focused on whether certain terms of the SHPO were necessary and proportionate. The appellant argued that some terms were overly restrictive and not supported by evidence, such as the non-contact provision with children and the requirement for risk management software on all devices.

The Court of Appeal agreed that some terms of the SHPO were too broad and not proportionate. The court revised the SHPO to make it more specific and manageable, ensuring it provided necessary protection without being overly burdensome.

The revised SHPO included restrictions on internet use, notification of devices to the police, and prohibition on using certain apps and cloud storage without police approval. The court removed the non-contact provision and other overly restrictive terms.