Gail Wright jailed for “sending underage boys naked selfies”

    Gail Wright jailed for “sending underage boys naked selfies”

    40
    SHARE
    Photo from the BBC

    Introduction

    It is not often that sex offenders are female, but when they do, it tends to get a disproportionate amount of attention.

    So it was that Gail Wright, a 44 year old from Shireoaks in Nottinghamshire , found herself in the papers when she was jailed for two years on 19th July 2016.

     

    Facts

    As is often the case (although less so with the BBC in fairness), the headline is slightly misleading. It implies that Ms Wright got 2 years for sending naked pictures of herself to some teenage boys.

    In fact, as the story makes clear, Ms Wright went considerably further than that.

    She did send sexually explicit photos and videos of herself to five boys, some of these also contained sexually explicit comments.

    More significantly though, she had a ‘sexual relationship’ with one of them whilst he was 15. It was this that would have lead to the prison sentence.

     

    Sentence

    We don’t know much about the facts in any detail. The offences were :

    • 1 x sexual activity with a child
    • 2 x possessing an indecent image of a child
    • 4 x causing a child to look at images of sexual activity (s12 Sexual Offences Act 2003)

    It should be noted that, notwithstanding that Ms Wright bought gifts for the boys, she was not charged with any offence of grooming.

    There are Guidelines for these offences. Starting with the sexual activity charge (the most serious), it’s presumably Culpability A. The Harm Category will depend on the nature of the sexual activity (p47).

    On the face of the sentence, it would have been non-penetrative activity, but it is hard to say.

    The guidelines for the ‘selfies’ offences are at page 57. With this, without any idea of exactly what the images consisted of, it is hard to comment.

     

    Conclusion

    The headline is a bit misleading here. On the face of it, Ms Wright has committed serious offences and could consider herself somewhat lucky in only receiving a sentence of 2 years.

    Hopefully there will be more details to follow, in which case we will look at this again.

    SHARE
    Dan is a barrister at 2 Dr. Johnson’s Buildings practising in crime.

    40 COMMENTS

    1. We have spoken about the wide and sometimes disproportionate sentencing. Here is a women who is convicted of sexual activity with a child and gets 2 years. Adam Johnson got 6 years. So where is the consistency ? Maybe because she’s female ?

      • I’ve spoken before about the disproportionate killing of women by men, we have more women being killed by men and male violence, year on year, than there were solider’s slain on the front line in Afghan. So where is the consistency? Maybe because they’re female and don’t conduct themselves like animals.

        • Yes, men commit a lot more violent crimes than women. However your comment is completely irrelevant to what CS said. He was talking about consistency in sentencing.
          Apologies for my “mansplaining”

          • You like to mansplain to me so knock yourself out with it. If there is any gender inconsistency at all in the criminal justice system it is with the frequency with which one gender (men) commit crime compared with the other (women) and how much more often men commit violent crime. Therefore when someone chooses to raise alleged gender inconsistency in the system, while ignoring the elephant in the room (which is: WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH MEN), it is important that it is put into the context of which gender is committing most of the crime.

        • Do you think that in principle it was right to send this defendant down, L-E-S?

          I do. Adults must not use the bodies of children for their own sexual enjoyment, whatever the gender of either. The fact that overwhelmingly it is men doing it to girls should make no difference when it is some other combination.

          Nor should the likelihood that the victim, when it comes to light, is more likely to brag than to complain. it is still abuse.

          • I completely agree it was right to send Gail Wright to prison. Should I repeat that for the hard of thinking (not you Andrew). It was a just and fair decision to send her to prison. She sounds like she had a prolific taste for men under the age of 16 which, if she had any sense, she would have curbed. What I don’t want to hear is some bloke whining about inconsistent treatment in the CJS due to gender. The gender committing nearly all the crime (and getting caught so they aren’t any good at it) are male however instead of men looking at that and tackling other men about what they do, they want to whine because the one woman in in a sea of men appears to them (and as you’ve explained she hadn’t) to have got off lightly which is why I challenged it and then waited for the man beasts to spring to life.

            • Oh its so easy LES. If I were a fisherman I wouldn’t bother with a rod as you’d just jump straight into the keep net. The problem with you trolls is you’re so easy to catch.

    2. Captain, we don’t know the nature of the sexual activity – we do know what Mr J did. Nor do we know whether this defendant pleased which Johnson did not.

    3. Silly woman. Although the fact that she was chatting up multiple teenage boys suggests she does have some sort of problem rather than it being a one-off act of foolishness. However, as usual, I consider it a complete waste of everyone’s time and resources to send her to jail when she probably hasn’t done any actual harm. Suspended sentence plus counselling to address her boundaries and/or fetish for teenage boys would be a better approach. (Unless she was actually abusive towards them,of course, but I think it’s far more likely they were coerced into testifying by the police than that they were coerced into sexual activity by Ms Wright.)

      • Didn’t Johnson accept some of his charges too ? Didn’t he also receive consecutive sentences as opposed to concurrent (vaguely remember something like this) ?

        I think Dan explained in the piece above that it was more than selfies and the charges indicate the nature of what occurred.

        So is everyone of the opinion that sentencing is consistent ?

        • I think Johnson entered a very late guilty plea though (IIRC) so he didn’t get the full 1/3 discount for it, and of course got no discount for the charges he contested. However, as Andrew pointed out, Wright’s sentence would have been 3 years if she hadn’t pleaded (pled?), not the 6 Johnson got.

    4. Captain Incomprehensible doesn’t want to confront male violence and male criminality which is oversaturating the CJS in other words – the WTAF is wrong with men particle. Although I liked the analogy to fishing and hope for a perfect storm to deal with him/

    5. Women are usually punished far more leniently than men.

      Take this example from today’s Express and Star: Lyndsey Anslow took a mobile phone and bus pass from the vulnerable 33-year-old as he walked to his home in Dudley. The court heard she had a history of targeting vulnerable people, including two men in wheelchairs.

      Judge Waite told her: “You have an appalling record of dishonesty.” Miss Lynette McClement, prosecuting, said the victim was approached by Anslow, aged 35, after getting off his bus at around 10pm in October last year and asked if he wanted to ‘do business’ for £5.

      He declined, understanding that she meant prostituted sex, but Anslow grabbed him by the arm and walked him to a spot between houses where she performed a sexual act on him. He pleaded with Anslow to stop, telling her his parents would be worried about him, Wolverhampton Crown Court heard.

      Miss McClement said the victim suffered from moderate learning difficulties and had a limited ability to communicate with others but had made it clear to Anslow he wanted her to stop. “All he wanted to do was go home. He described feeling sick, upset and scared. He spoke of looking up at the sky, telling Anslow he needed to go home,” she said.

      Afterwards Anslow suggested going to a friend’s house but again he declined and this time she left. When he later got home he realised his phone and bus pass were missing from his shoulder bag, and could not sleep that night for worrying, the court heard.

      Read more at http://www.expressandstar.com/news/crime/2016/07/26/jailed-prostitute-carried-out-sex-attack-on-man-with-cerebral-palsy/#807XIDUEy34cHDGT.99

      Would a man who had attacked a vulnerable woman who was walking home at night, performed oral sex on her, and robbed her, only get 16 months?

      • Patrick, doesn’t that just highlight the capriciousness of sentencing in general though? That woman committed sexual assault and robbery on a disabled victim and yet got a lesser sentence than Gail Wright.

        • Sentencing is not an exact science. The judge who sentenced Adam Johnson might have given Gail Wright a bit more; the judge who sentenced Gail Wright might have given Adam Johnson a bit less. That does not make either sentence wrong – and certainly not “capricious”. And don’t kid yourself that you are getting the full story from any organ of the press.

          • I accept that you do not get the full story from the press. I wonder if Lyndsey Anslow was not prosecuted for sexual assault, but just for theft.

            The report quotes the prosecution saying that it was a forced sexual assault on a helpless victim, but the judge said “You have an appalling record of dishonesty, including offences involving vulnerable men. You have associated offers of sexual favours in the hope it was less likely they would report the thefts.” That suggests that the judge was sentencing a prostitute for stealing from a client, rather than a sexual predator. Perhaps the CPS decided that they would not be able to get a conviction for sexual assault on a man by a woman.

    6. I’m starting to think L-E-S is doing a Nigel Tufnell here (Spinal Tap)
      “Why don’t you make 10 one louder?”
      Nigel – “These go to eleven”

      • Brian Pinewood I have never seen or read Spinal Tap sounds like the usual pile of excrement that men rave about however I’m starting to think Brian, that the gender who are not women, don’t like it when they whine about the alleged inconsistency and alleged gender bias in the CJS while ignoring the MASSIVE ELEPHANT in the courtroom which is: the gender that is not female propensity for violence, criminality and sexual offences. And that when someone who is of the gender that is not male mentions this, it causes them to wish to shoot the messenger anything but to confront the problem which men. Just saying.

        • Black men commit more crime. Are black men the problem ? Is the biggest elephant in the courtroom (the statistical fact that black men have the highest propensity for violence, criminality and sexual offences) being ignored ? Furthermore black women have a far higher propensity for violence, criminality and sexual offences. Would you therefore conclude that even though “men are the problem”, black is THE problem ? Would you also conclude blacks are “conducting themselves like animals” ? Should we all ask loudly “WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH BLACKS ?”

          • In addition I would ask how come the white animals, who work in The City, and get away literally with daylight robbery, and walk, and who are NEVER held to account for their crimes, why is that. And my question would be & very loudly WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK IS WRONG WITH [WHITE(S)] MEN and why are they never charged?! In addition, as usual, the problem comes down to men & the WTAF is wrong with them particle.

            • Perhaps you think justice would be best served by judges who are both black and female ?

              Holding out for a hero like Constance Briscoe to make the ugly world beautiful ?

    7. judge worthy When a black man or a group of black men steal £571 million pounds from pensioners on the street in broad day light NEVER will it be said that what they did was perfectly legal and within the law. They’d be in jail so fast we could track them to their cells by the friction burns. Just saying.

      • I would suggest the fraudulent nature of the money system is off topic. Legislation has ensured a pound sterling is no longer that.

        Once that legal gem was put in place by lawmakers there was no end to the chicanery available to everyone regardless of sex or race.

        There is little protestation about it.

        • It’s not off topic you chose to stigmatise black men. When it is the male gender, not their colour, who are the problem when it comes to crime. In doing so I highlighted that the political, economic and legal systems put in place by white men protects white men above all else and especially from being held to account for wrongdoing.

          • No stigmatisation. I was merely seeking clarification of your position using facts.

            As for any perceived problems of crime, a well written definition of wrongdoing would surely be essential, would it not ?

    8. You did stigmatise black men. It’s men who are the problem their colour/race is irrelevant. “A well written definition of wrong doing” is the sort of bullshitty comment used in order to fog the issue under discussion.

    9. Fog the issue ? Au contraire ma chérie.

      You focused on statistics to highlight men in general as being more likely to commit violent and/or sexual crime. No guilty plea of the stigmatisation of men was forthcoming. Your defence was presumably the stats prove you are innocent ? Those same stats were dismissed as irrelevant when focused on more intently. Additionally the “is” became an “ought” in relation to crime/wrongdoing.

      Far from fogging the issue the “is” element seems essential. (The writers of this blog could well say it is the only element).

      For example, a historical sexual offence (wrongdoing) was adultery. Seen by many, indeed most, diverse cultures as so serious a crime (wrongdoing) consequences were severe. In some cases warranting capital punishment.

      If one was to focus on statistics including adultery as a crime (wrongdoing) gender may well be dismissed as an irrelevancy.

      • You love the sound of your own voice go preach to men who commit crime and make the world an unbearable place. I switched off several messages ago. au contraire… yawn

    10. Ohh dear L-E-S I think that the BIGGEST ELEPHANT in the room is that you so clearly need counselling for you sad firmly held unshakable over asserted aggressive beliefs about men!

      • Yes I know that if I believe that the gender who commit 92% of all violent crime in the UK and 98%+ of all sexual offences are The problem and I say so that I must be the one in need of help. I’ve been told this before, many times, usually by men, and as we know if a man says something it must be true. They never condemn or challenge the behaviour of men though I wonder why that is.

    LEAVE A REPLY