Child sex offender Joshua Redding from Woolhampton avoids jail again

A CHILD sex offender who complained he was unable to get work was rebuked by a judge.

Joshua Redding appeared in the dock at Reading Crown Court on Friday, May 16, for breaking the terms of his suspended sentence order.

Last August the 24-year-old, of Bath Road, Woolhampton, was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment, suspended for two years.

He had been convicted of

* Trying to cause a child to look at an image of a person engaging in a sexual activity.

* Communicating with an underage girl in a sexualised way.

* Having nine indecent images of children in Category A, the most serious and extreme kind.

* Similar charges in respect of four images in Category B and two in Category C.

* Two offences of possessing extreme pornography depicting bestiality and physical damage to a person’s genitals.

* Possessing prohibited images of children.

After the sentencing, Det Con Claire Midwinter, based at Newbury Police Station, said: “Our fight against child sexual abuse will never stop.

“I hope this conviction highlights not only our commitment to tackling these crimes but also to protect all children and tracking down anyone who seeks to harm them.”

At Friday’s sentencing hearing, a probation officer said Redding, who used to live in Theale, had missed two appointments.

Belinda Knight, defending, said her client had co-operated with all the other terms of the suspended sentence order, including unpaid community work.

She said his parents, who accompanied him to court, were supportive of their son and went on: “Basically, it’s two missed appointments.

“I think probably he’s had enough of a warning already.”

And she added: “His financial circumstances are not good; he is on benefits.

“The probation report says he’s made several job applications – that’s a gross underestimate.

“In fact he has made around 100 job applications – but as soon as employers know about these offences, he doesn’t even hear back.”

Judge Neil Millard told Redding: “These were serious offences.

“They are offences this court takes incredibly seriously and right-thinking members of the public find them outrageous and disgusting – and that’s the reason you’ve had difficulty in getting jobs thereafter.”

He acknowledged that Redding should not have missed two appointments with probation.

However, he considered that, overall, Redding had demonstrated a high level of compliance and it would be manifestly unjust to activate the suspended sentence.

Instead, he marked the offending with a £50 fine.