Commission of Child Sex Offences Online: Hugh Nelson Jailed for 18 years for Child Sex Offences Including Making and Distributing Indecent Images of Children
Bolton Crown Court today jailed Hugh Nelson for 18 years imprisonment, and a further 6 years on licence upon release.
Contact Us
Nelson had pleaded guilty to 16 offences relating to the sexual abuse of children of which include making indecent images of children, distribution of indecent images of children, intentionally encouraging or assisting the commission of the rape of a child under the age 13
and attempting to incite a child aged under 16 years to engage in sexual activity. The offences were committed online where the defendant was the administrator of an encrypted chat room whereby likeminded individuals discussed the abuse of children, bought and exchanged indecent images of children.
This is an extremely lengthy sentence, and in addition to the long custodial sentence Nelson would have been made subject to a Sexual Harm Prevention Order
(SHPO) and the notification requirements of the Sex Offenders Register
for life.
Indecent Images of Children
Making an indecent image of a child can have many meanings; to download, to take, to permit to be taken, to open an attachment containing an image, storing an image in a directory on a computer, accessing a pornographic website whereby indecent images appear as a pop up, receiving an image via social media, and live streaming of images.
It is an offence under section 1(1)(a)of the Protection of Children Act 1978
for a person to make an indecent image of a child. Making is usually the offence a suspect will be charged with rather than possession. When a device is seized, it may be the case that an image is stored in such a way that it is not possible to say that the suspect possessed it, because it is not accessible to them. For a person to be in possession of an indecent image of a child, they must have custody and control over the image and must be able to access the image. Therefore, making is the preferred charge, where all the prosecution must prove is that the user of the device knowingly made the image at some stage.
In the case Hugh Nelson, it appears he was generating indecent image of children using AI technology, taking a real photo of a child and using his knowledge of computer graphics to place that child into a sexual image. He would then put his made images into circulation by distributing them online and would accept payment for doing so. It is said that he made over £5,000 making and selling the indecent images.
Distribution of indecent images of children is a serious offence, and on its own carried a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment. It is an offence under
section 1(1)(c) of the Protection of Children Act
for a person to have in their possession any indecent images with a view to it being distributed or shown by them to others. The words “with a view to” require that the distribution or showing must be at least one of the suspects purposes, but not necessarily the primary purpose. It seems that proving the intention of Hugh Nelson was not difficult for the prosecution as he was actively taking money from people and orders for his AI generated images.
Encouraging or Assisting the Commission of the Rape of a Child Under 13 Years Old.
Section 44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 makes it an offence for a person to do an act which is capable of encouraging or assisting the commission of an offence; and with the intention that they intend to encourage or assist in its commission. The law provides that where it is proved that a person has committed this offence, they have secondary liability for the actual offence. The prosecution would not be required to prove that the encouragement or assistance had a positive effect on the other person’s conduct or the outcome.
It is a serious offence which carries a lengthy term of imprisonment upon conviction. The court took into consideration that they could not be sure whether or not the encouragement of Hugh Nelson actually led to the commission of any rape of a child.
Attempting to Incite a Child aged Under 16 Years Old to Engage in Sexual Activity
An offence charged under
s.1 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981
is commonly seen in sexual offence cases, particularly offences which involve sexual communication. The CPS will charge under the attempts act when the suspect has been talking to an under-cover police officer or hunter group, this is because they were not talking to a real child and it is therefore an attempt to sexually communicate with one, or as in the case of Nelson, incite a child to engage in sexual activity.
It is known that in Nelson’s case that he was caught by an undercover police officer taking part in a chat room where Nelson was a participant. It is likely that the content of the conversations which would have been recorded by police played a crucial role in providing evidence which ultimately led to his arrest and conviction.
Sexual Harm Prevention Order
Following a conviction for an offence listed within schedule 3 or 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, it is often that in most cases the court will make a Sexual Harm Prevention Order. Such an order will prohibit the defendant from certain activities which relate to the commission of the offences they have been convicted of. In this case it is likely any order will prohibit contact with children and also internet and device use.
Sex Offenders Register Requirements
The Sex Offenders Register is going to be a mandatory requirement for Hugh Nelson, and he is likely to be the subject of this for life. However, where a person is made subject to the Sex Offenders Register for life, they can apply for removal from it after being on it for 15 years. The requirements for a person to notify as part of their Sex Offender Requirements begin either upon the entering of a guilty plea, or their release from prison.
The Sentence and Credit
When sentenced Hugh Nelson would have been awarded credit for his guilty pleas to the offences. Credit is given in cases where a defendant pleads guilty at their earliest opportunity. The starting point is for one third reduction to be made from any sentence, this then reduces on a sliding scale as time passes in a case. A defendant pleading guilty close to trial or on the day of trial is unlikely to get much credit, and sometimes non at all. Understanding the principle of credit is very important, and it is essential all defendants are properly advised and guided in respect of credit and any evidence against them. If a person is looking at a considerable amount of years in prison, as Hugh Nelson was, credit can make a huge reduction on final sentence.
Mitigation was also present by Nelson's barrister. Strong mitigation can assist at sentence, and can move a defendant into lower sentencing brackets. Therefore, thorough preparation for sentence even where a guilty plea is entered is incredibly important.
Eventum Legal
At Eventum Legal we represent clients at all stages of proceedings both where guilty pleas are entered, and not guilty pleas. We stand by our clients and build a robust approach to their case to achieve the best possible outcome. With over 25 years combined experience we are able to navigate complex legal issues to ensure the plea our client is entering is in their best interests. We spend the time with clients and prospective clients to ensure they understand their case, possible defence strategies and options. Contact us free of charge
for no obligation discussion and guidance on how we can approach your case and provide the legal advice and support you need.
We Can Help With
Have you been charged with indecent image possession? Do you want to know how many cases get dropped? Read our latest article to learn more.
Understanding the difference between “consent” and “reasonable belief” can be key if you are being investigated or prosecuted for a sexual offence, where these two issues can arise. These are not just technical legal terms; they are real-world concepts that can affect the outcome of serious sexual abuse cases. At Eventum Legal, our aim is to help people grasp these important ideas so that they know where they stand, whether they’re seeking justice, facing an accusation, or just wanting to be informed. Consent and the Law: What Does It Mean? When it comes to sexual activity, the law makes it very clear that “consent” isn’t just about saying yes or no. Consent means agreeing by choice, having the freedom and capacity to make that choice, and being able to change your mind at any time, even if the sexual activity has begun. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that a person consents if they agree by choice and have the freedom and capacity to do so. In practical terms, this means no one should be pressured, forced, or tricked into sex. If someone is too drunk, too scared, or otherwise unable to decide, they cannot legally give consent. This applies also to issues with mental capacity where someone may not have the understanding or ability to give informed consent. When establishing whether consent or reasonable belief applies, the courts examine everything that happened, how the people involved acted, what was said, their relationship, and whether any threats were made. It’s not about just hearing a yes or no, but about whether the agreement was truly given, freely and knowingly, at the time. Reasonable Belief: The Other Side of the Coin While “consent” focuses on the person on the receiving end of sexual activity, “reasonable belief” is about the perspective of the person accused of the crime. UK law says it’s not enough for someone to claim they thought the other person was consenting. The belief that consent existed must be reasonable; it must meet the standard of what a reasonable person would think in those circumstances. This comes down to two questions: did the accused genuinely believe the other person was consenting, and would a reasonable person, knowing what the accused knew and considering everything that happened, have reached the same conclusion? It’s not a defence to say, “I just thought it was okay,” if evidence, actions, or common sense didn’t back that belief up. Courts look at whether the accused checked for consent, paid attention to what was happening, and took steps to make sure everything was agreed upon. How the Law Applies These Concepts The distinction between consent and reasonable belief matters because everyone is responsible for ensuring that consent is present, not just assuming or hoping it is. The prosecution in a sexual offence case has to prove that there was no consent or that the accused did not have a reasonable belief that consent existed. To judge this, courts examine the context: Were both people sober and able to make decisions? Was there clear, positive agreement? Did one person ignore signs of hesitation or discomfort? In cases where someone is very intoxicated or unable to communicate, the law presumes that there is no consent, and it is challenging for anyone to claim a reasonable belief otherwise. However, where alcohol is in question the issue can become complex as we all have difference alcohol tolerances, what may be too drunk to one person, could be different to the other. Therefore, working to establish the intoxication and affect is crucial for lawyers in some cases. In cases where it can be proven that that someone was too drunk to speak or move, and the accused says they thought there was consent just because the person didn’t say “no,” the court is unlikely to accept that as reasonable. The law expects people to check in with their partner, look for positive signs, and stop if there’s any doubt. Clearing Up Common Myths Many misunderstandings exist about how consent and reasonable belief work in real life. One myth is that if someone doesn’t say “no,” they must have agreed. The absence of a “no” is not the same as a “yes.” Another myth is that if two people are in a relationship or have had sex before, consent is always assumed. Every sexual act requires consent, every time. Some people also believe that as long as they honestly thought there was consent, that’s enough. But the law sets a higher bar: the belief has to be reasonable, meaning it must be backed up by what happened and what a reasonable person would think. In our digital age, misunderstandings can easily happen through text or online communication. Courts are aware of this and look at all available evidence, including messages and social media, to determine what happened. Other avenues of evidence exploration can include CCTV footage and witnesses. Why These Legal Standards Matter The way UK law approaches consent and reasonable belief has changed over time. In the past, people could argue they had an “honest” belief in consent, even if it wasn’t reasonable. That changed with the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which now requires honesty and reasonableness. This protects people from harm and ensures that the law takes the experiences and choices of everyone involved seriously. These rules are designed to keep people safe and ensure everyone’s rights are respected. The law encourages open communication, respect, and responsibility. It expects everyone to look for clear signs of agreement and to stop if there is any doubt or hesitation. What To Do If You’re Involved In A Sexual Offence Case Suppose you’re facing a situation involving consent or reasonable belief and you as the accused want to prove that either of these legal requirements existed, then you must seek legal advice and engage with specialist lawyers who can navigate the complexities of the key legal issues in sexual offence cases. These cases can be stressful and complex, and every detail matters: what was said, what was done, and what steps were taken to ensure everyone agreed. At Eventum Legal, we specialise in helping people understand their rights and responsibilities. We listen, explain your options in straightforward language, and support you throughout the process, always with respect and confidentiality. Whether you’re seeking justice, defending your reputation, or simply want to know your rights, we’re here to help. Frequently Asked Questions What is the difference between consent and reasonable belief? Consent is when a person freely agrees to a sexual act. Reasonable belief is whether the accused genuinely and reasonably believed that consent was given, based on all the facts. Can someone be convicted if they misunderstood consent? Yes, if their belief in consent wasn’t reasonable. The court looks at the whole situation, not just what the accused thought. How can I protect myself or prove consent? Open communication and ensuring everyone is comfortable and willing are the safest approaches. If you’re worried about misunderstandings, keep records of conversations. Where can I get help or advice? Contact Eventum Legal for confidential, expert support tailored to your needs.
Have you been accused of breaching your SHPO, maybe by accident or knowingly? Speak to our specialist team.
