A JUDGE has said it was “wholly beyond most people’s comprehension” that a mother sent indecent images of her own daughter to a man she knew to be a paedophile.
Cardiff Crown Court heard the woman took photographs of her young daughter while she was partially undressed and sent them to a man with whom she was in a “relationship”. One image, showing the child half-naked on a sofa, was later assessed as a Category C indecent image.
The woman, who cannot be named to protect her daughter’s identity, later told police she could not explain why she had committed the offences. She said her relationship at the time was “poor”, she felt “lost”, and had “enjoyed the attention” she received from the man, who lived across the border.
Alex Granville, prosecuting, said that in 2023 West Mercia Police passed information to South Wales Police after recovering images during the arrest of a known paedophile. Investigators established that the defendant had sent the man eight photographs of her primary school-aged daughter.
When officers went to arrest the woman at her home, the court heard she was overheard telling her children words to the effect that “mummy has been in conversation with a silly man who has got her into trouble”.
The defendant, who is in her 30s and has no previous convictions, pleaded guilty to making and distributing an indecent image of a child. The court was told her children are no longer in her care.
Her defence counsel said she had been tearful during conferences and had told them she felt she had ruined her life. A psychiatric report concluded she was suffering from complex post-traumatic stress disorder.
Passing sentence, Judge Paul Thomas KC said it was impossible for most people to comprehend how a mother could send an indecent image of her own child to a man she knew to be a paedophile, knowing he wanted the image for sexual gratification.
“On any view, what you did was a terrible breach of trust,” he said, adding it was fortunate the woman’s “pandering” behaviour was discovered before matters went further.
The judge said any sentence imposed would “pale into insignificance” compared with the lifelong burden the woman would carry for what she had done and the impact on her family.
Taking into account her guilty pleas, the woman was sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years. She was ordered to complete a rehabilitation programme and carry out 150 hours of unpaid work. She will remain on the sex offenders’ register for 10 years and is subject to a sexual harm prevention order for the same period.
