November 2018

Extreme pornography ‘in plain sight’ on chat room pervert’s computer

A Suffolk pervert could be facing jail after uploading sick images of children online – under the pseudonym ‘bbyboy’.

Michael Banham admitted being in possession of child sexual abuse images, ranging from the lowest to most extreme category, after police raided his home and seized several devices last October.

The 33-year-old also pleaded guilty to possessing other prohibited images of children and extreme pornography involving animals.

Suffolk Magistrates’ Court how Banham was traced to an address in Eye after police were made aware of indecent images being uploaded online.

Prosecutor David Bryant said: “Officers received information that a user named ‘bbyboy’ had uploaded images via Google and Chatspot.

“They executed a warrant under section four of the Protection of Children Act and seized a number of devices, hard drives and removable media.

“There were a number of category A, B and C indecent images of children, and extreme pornography images, on just about all devices – images and movies, including 57 extreme pornography movies in plain sight or easily accessible.”

When first interviewed on October 13 last year, Banham admitted searching for pornography and confessed: “I may have looked at other stuff and I’m ever-so sorry.”

During another interview in July this year, he agreed to having searched for indecent images of children and looking at very extreme pornographic material, Mr Bryant told the court.

Banham, of Century Road, Eye, appeared in court without legal representation and entered guilty pleas to five separate charges.

When asked if he had anything else to add, Banham told magistrates: “I’m sorry for what I did.”

He was released from the court on unconditional bail and ordered to begin signing the sex offenders register before being sentenced by a judge at a later date.

Banham, who was convicted of harassment in 2011, will be required to attend Ipswich Crown Court following the preparation of a pre-sentence report by the probation service.

Magistrates declined his request for postal notification of the hearing to be directed to his local police station rather than his home address, where he lives with his father.