A Somerset man who used social networking site Facebook to groom teenage boys, tricking some into sending him naked pictures of themselves and later sexually molesting two of his victims, is to be allowed to continue using Facebook - after a judge ruled that banning him would be "excessive".
19 year old Callum Dower, of Queen Camel near Yeovil, used Facebook to contact boys as young as 14 and make homosexual advances at them.
He would urge them to send him pictures of themselves, often via mobile phone, and in some instances would pose as a girl in order to trick his victims into sending lewd photos.
His attentions did not stop with photographs, he subsequently molested one boy in a supermarket toilet, and another in his car.
Appearing at Taunton Crown Court for sentencing, Dower had previously admitted two charges of sexual activity with a child, five charges of causing or inciting a child to take part in pornography, and six charges of making an indecent image of a child.
Judge Graham Hume Jones sentenced Dower to a 3 year community order, banned him from working with children, and ordered him to be electronically tagged and to obey an overnight curfew for 3 months. He must also sign the sex offenders register for 5 years.
However, Judge Jones seemingly accepted defence pleas that banning Dower from using Facebook would excessive.
Apparently it is taken for granted by people of his age, and a ban on his using such sites would be "particularly excessive" according to Dowers' barrister.
Does that make any sense? He uses Facebook to find and groom his victims, he's convicted, and yet banning him from social networking sites would be "excessive" because he needs it to socialise.
Really makes you feel confident that perverts who prowl social networking sites will be stopped once caught, and children will be protected, doesn't it?
