Derek Osbourne jailed for two years

A former Liberal Democrat council leader who admitted “appalling” child pornography offences was jailed for two years today.
derek osbourne
Derek Osbourne, 59, who stepped down as leader of Kingston upon Thames, south west London, in June, was told that the public interest “cries out for custody”.

He was also told he must register as a sex offender for the next 10 years.

Judge Alistair McCreath, sitting at Southwark Crown Court, told him: “This imagery is of real children, suffering real abuse.

“Of course you did not perpetrate that abuse directly yourself, but you and others like you are complicit it, because without people to look at it, there would be no point in doing it.”

Osbourne was first elected as a councillor in 1986 before becoming leader between 1997 and 1998, and again in 2003.

He was parliamentary candidate for Kingston upon Thames in 1992, fighting the then chancellor Norman Lamont.

Osbourne, of Burlington Road, New Malden, pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to seven counts of making indecent images of children, four counts of possession of indecent images of children and six counts of distributing indecent images of children.

The judge said he recognised in Osbourne’s favour that he had reached the age of nearly 60 without being convicted of any offence.

It also stood in his favour that he had for many years given service in public life.

“But on the other hand, those who by choice occupy a position of authority in public life, owe a duty to the public to behave to the highest of standards.”

He also gave him credit for his early plea of guilty, giving him a discount of a third.

The judge said he had to deal with him for downloading 2,844 still images, and 293 movies, of children.

“All these children were subjected to abuse of one kind or another, some of it truly appalling. It’s stomach turning.”

Some of the children were as young as three, he added.

Mirror 29/10/13

 

23 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

23 responses to “Derek Osbourne jailed for two years

  1. Principle5000

    The Sentence is Still a Bloody Sick Joke

    It is an Insult to the Victims

  2. gw

    I think 2 years is fair – for possession. Hall for 30 months for far worse.

    • jen

      I’m sorry but I don’t agree with you. As Leader of Kingston Council, Osbourne held an extremely sensitive position of trust in a borough which was rated as having inadequate child protection services under his watch. But what can you expect with a paedophile running children’s services. His sentence should have been as least as long as the teacher who ran off with a pupil.

      • Totally agree with you. Judges seem to be sending out messages of ‘support’ to these low life evil monsters, without any thought to all the terrified victims. I have read so many cases of Judges making ‘dodgy’ decisions recently, that I have got to the point where I want to spit! WAKE UP GREAT BRITAIN and insist your kids ARE PROTECTED FROM THESE MONSTERS!

  3. scandal

    2,844 still images, and 293 movies and he only got 2 years Slap on the wrist from a judicial sympathiser. Why is this treated in isolation, why isn’t everyplace he downloaded images or movies from prosecuted as well?

  4. chess

    If this wasn’t so effing stomach turning I’d have to laugh. So he got to the age of almost 60 without being convicted of any offence – so all of a sudden he has thousands of what the judge himself (surely a candidate fo JudgeMental) classed as ‘truly appalling stomach turning stills and vids of children as young as 3’. This came on him all of a sudden when he was 59, this urge to see little kids being tortured? Of course not, that simply means he hadn’t been caught til now. And a third off discount for admitting guilt, what’s this? B&Q Golden Oldies Wenesday discount? Babies of 3 years old. Doesn’t this stink of corruption? I bet one of we plebs without political connections would have not got away that lightly.

  5. jen

    “The judge said he recognised in Osbourne’s favour that he had reached the age of nearly 60 without being convicted of any offence”.

    So he managed to get to the age of 60 without getting caught and this went in his favour.

    “It also stood in his favour that he had for many years given service in public life”.

    Why on earth would the fact that a totally unsuitable person who gave years of service go in his favour? It’s absolutely appalling that this perverted character was, for years, involved in children’s services and education.

    • Totally agree with everything you’ve said. Next they’ll be saying someone kept their shoes shiny, so give them six months off their sentence. All paedos are devious and good liars, so not surprised he didn’t have previous convictions. When you do catch the buggers, you’ve got ‘dodgy’ Judges letting them go. The government and the justice system needs a complete overhaul, for the sake of child abuse victims and FUTURE CHILD ABUSE VICTIMS and I think the whole country should be demanding just that.

  6. Jailed for two years and will probably serve one. Ten years on the Sex Offenders Register. So after ten years he won’t be a paedophile then???? Will there ever come a time when child abuse victims out there will get justice? Over to our PM, who seems to have his head in the sand, along with our government, on this evil, evil crime against poor, traumatised, defenceless kids. Hard enough to actually get one of these monsters into court, without giving them ridiculous jail sentences. Shame on our government and it’s so called ‘JUSTICE SYSTEM’ – IT STINKS!!!!

  7. Lanark

    Look at that photo. Right smug faced child porn enthusiast isn’t he? So the judge congratulates this sick piece of human excreta for having “reached the age of 60 without any convictions”? So did Savile. So that explains a 2 year sentence. He’ll serve one in an open prison and will be on regular home leave within a month from now.
    This guy was distributing “truly appalling” images and movies of children as young as 3 years old being raped and assaulted. Some of those children will surely have been snuffed since being raped and filmed…

    But he hadn’t been caught up until now. So that’s all right. Well done Judge, you guys have really got your eye on the ball here.

    • Nearly every day I’m reading about ‘dodgy’ Judges, who either give absolutely ridiculously low jail sentences or they let the monsters go. Why isn’t the PM sorting this out? He must read the newspapers or maybe he is too busy ‘covering up’ for the VIP paedos in his own government. Every child out there, whether they have two loving parents or are stuck in a care home, have the right to be paedo free and it is our and our governments duty to ‘protect’ them. Why oh why are these evil, low life sexual deviants being put before the kids time after time? Maybe David Cameron would take time out and give an answer to that question, as I’m sure every parent and kid out there would like to know.

  8. prefer to remain anonymous

    I am frankly disgusted. This man who ignored repeated requests to step down from being leader for the failings of ss in the borough – and who ignored serious concerns raised internally in the borough and was directly involved in child protection committees in the borough is now suddenly a moral upstanding citizen. And which planet is this judge living on?

  9. As a victim of CSA i can not agree more with the sentiments above, how could a judge be so crude, such an insult to folks like myself, i have said this before if folks get caught receiving stolen goods they get a harsher sentence as it perpetuates the the criminal act, surely it should be the same in the case of child porn/indecent images, or whatever political correct term is in play these days.
    On a side note i read that some where in the us pedophillia has been classed as a sexual orientation, absolute madness.

    http://brynalynvictims.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/sad-day-for-child-human-rights.html

    Andy

    • Yes, an insult to every child abuse victim out there and it has to stop. People are responsible for their actions and THIS DOES INCLUDE PAEDOPHILES. You want to look at horrific pictures of kids being sexually abused then you belong in jail and throw away the key. You want to sexually assault a kid, because of your sick, depraved sexual orientation, then you belong in jail and throw away the key. There is no cure for low life scum like this and the only way to keep children safe is if every last one of them is behind bars and throw away the key.

  10. LJMT

    I just think that it is a downright awful sentence. Did this judge have no memory of being a child himself? How children trust adults, need them for protection and advice, and thus can be led easily by adults? Did it not occur to him that some of these children were probably in care? That some of them had lost a family, had few possessions, and then some bastard robs them of one thing, a very precious thing that they do have, the possession of a body, that they had taken for granted was inviolably themselves. ( I am writing this from the outside not having suffered such abuse myself.) It makes one very angry.

    Are these people totally dim, totally unimaginative, or are they collaborators? It is sometimes so difficult to tell the first from the second. A good long read of Dickens, who can get you back into the skin of what it felt like to be a child might well help!

  11. I think David Cameron should get a list of every Judge that has either given a lenient sentence to a known paedophile or let them off and ask them to ‘justify it’. If they can’t, then sack them. We have to rid the government of ‘cover ups’ for VIP paedos and get laws brought in that protect children and not monsters and make sure justice IS DONE in our courts. Whats been let happen out there can only be described as ‘barbaric’ and should never ever happen in a so called ‘civilised’ society.

  12. When is Justice ever going to be Done???

    • Over to our PM and the government to answer that question. I am sick to death of asking it and I’m sure every person in GB wants a response from him. All parents have a right to know their kids are safe from these monsters, but this just isn’t happening. It never has. Government even ‘cover up’ for this low life scum, because they are so called ‘VIPs’. I don’t call them that, I call them ‘SCUM’ Tell the truth and shame the devil, as my lovely mum used to say to me. People that care aren’t going to go away and keep quiet. ‘Cover ups’ of ‘cover ups’ won’t wash any more. More and more people and child abuse victims are going to talk out and this time they will heard.

  13. boom

    We should remember before we say that Mr Osbourne should have had a longer sentence that he has a family who also need to be thought about and respected. Im sure this year hasn’t been easy on them and having a much loved family member locked away would only be hurting his wife and children.