A convicted paedophile reoffended while subject to a suspended sentence having previously narrowly avoided imprisonment for similar matters, Dungannon Crown Court has heard.
Charles Campbell (57) from Muckros Road, Kesh admitted possessing an indecent image of a child and an extreme pornographic image June 20 2024.
He further admitted distrusting or showing an indecent image of a child on November 23 2023.
Offending was discovered when Campbell was arrested for breaching a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) which was dealt with separately, but in the course of investigation his phone was seized and police discovered the indecent child images.
A defence barrister said pre-sentence reports were necessary given the background and criminal record.
Judge Brian Sherrard agreed and remanded Campbell on continuing bail to return for sentencing on November 7.
Campbell is currently also on bail pending appeal after being sentenced to two months imprisonment earlier this year for breaching the SOPO.
Enniskillen Magistrates Court heard on June 15 2024 police received a report from an off-duty officer that Campbell had been conversing with two female children outside a restaurant.
He was observed putting his phone, “up to their faces and film them, smiling as he did so”.”
Due to previous convictions for voyeurism, installing equipment for recording as well as making and possessing indecent child images, Campbell was given a suspended sentence in 2023 and made subject to the SOPO which includes a ban on any unsupervised contact with children.
He was arrested and identified himself when shown CCTV footage, in which he was “Clearly seen talking to two young females, one aged 10 and the other aged four. Another teenage girl was seated nearby. He used his phone to video the children and a small dog who was with them and notably took a close-up of the four-year-old. He then tapped his phone and walked out of sight.”
In interview Campbell accepted talking to the children and asked if he could take their photo to put on his Snapchat.
The mother of one child told police he had approached her earlier in the day and asked if he could take a photograph of her dog.
The child was “a bit perplexed but agreed.”
Her parents confronted him, asking if he had filmed her but he denied this insisting he had taken an image of the dog which he sent to his daughter.
He denied the allegation and spent some time remanded in custody, later contesting the charge but was found guilty.