Fury as Cleveleys man gets away with police warning after sharing nude pictures of underaged girls

Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com 
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
Visit Shots! now
A Cleveleys man in his 20s has been let off with a ‘warning’ after admitting to possessing and sharing intimate images of children.

Lancashire Police are facing a backlash online after the force released the sex offender without charge - after he admitted the offences and was added to the sex offender’s register for the next two years.

People have voiced their anger and disbelief at the ‘slap on the wrist’, with hundreds taking to the Lancashire Police Facebook page demanding an explanation.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Many in the community also expressed concern that the man has not been named, because he has not been charged with an offence. It means police can not legally name him and therefore his identity will be protected.

Lancashire Police have since provided further details with some context on why the man wasn’t charged. You can view their statement at the bottom of this article.

Hybrid HacksHybrid Hacks
Hybrid Hacks

“A caution? Is this a sick joke?”

“A caution and only two years requirements!? Is this a joke?” asked Savannaħ Gracé.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“So, a man has been let off with a caution for having indecent images of children? Are you serious?”, said another.

“Caution isn't enough, name and shame him! He's an adult, so why hide his identity?,” asked Charlotte Scott.

While an anonymous comment appeared to sum up people’s concerns about the failure to charge the offender.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It said: “This statement from Lancashire Police highlights the severity of these crimes, yet their actions completely undermine it.

“They acknowledge that offenders can face imprisonment under the Online Safety Act 2023, yet they’ve chosen to issue a mere caution.

“This sends a dangerous message—that violating someone’s privacy in such a serious way will be met with little more than a warning.

“How can victims have faith in a system that refuses to enforce the full extent of the law?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“Lancashire Police need to explain why they are failing to take stronger action against offenders.”

Police sent out an urgent message relating to a case of alleged child crueltyPolice sent out an urgent message relating to a case of alleged child cruelty
Police sent out an urgent message relating to a case of alleged child cruelty | National World

What we know

Earlier this week, a man in his 20s from Cleveleys was given a caution after he admitted to possessing and sharing folders containing intimate images, including underaged girls.

It follows an investigation into reports that a number of people have had social media accounts hacked and data, including personal details, intimate images and videos stolen and shared online.

Lancashire Police said many of the folders being circulated contain illegal images of females under the age of 18.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The force said five other men have been arrested and are currently on bail whilst enquiries are ongoing in relation to the hacking of these social media accounts.

Under The Online Safety Act 2023, it is an offence to share an intimate photograph or film without consent, and offenders face up to 6 months imprisonment for doing so.

In the event that folders shared contain images of children under 18, the sentence increases significantly with those responsible also being further subject to sex offender management and requirement to sign the sex offender register.

Police explain why man wasn’t charged

Despite the offence carrying a potential prison sentence of six months or more, the Cleveleys man has been let off with a ‘caution’ - a formal warning usually given to people who admit to committing minor crimes.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The Gazette sought further details from Lancashire Police and the force provided the following clarification.

A police spokesman said: “The five on bail are for more serious offences - Creating, distributing and sharing of images and the man cautioned was in possession of the material they had created and he fully admitted the offences, so a caution was the most appropriate course of action.

“We won’t be naming him (we never have for a caution and nor would any other force) or confirming or denying any names.”

News you can trust since 1873
Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice