Pervert pair sent to prison: husband and wife took photos as they abused child (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Pervert pair sent to prison: husband and wife took photos as they abused child
9:06am Wednesday 26th September 2012 in Latest By Arron Hendy
Teaching assistant Barbara Cruise was jailed for two years
A HUSBAND and wife have been jailed for sexually abusing a child and taking a picture as they did so.
Daniel Cruise and wife Barbara, pictured, who is a teaching assistant, locked themselves in their bedroom and he tried to destroy evidence when police came knocking at their door in Luckham Road, Bournemouth.
But officers found thousands of downloaded images of children on his computer and another picture taken by him showed his wife abusing the girl, now aged seven, who was described by a judge as “vulnerable”.
The offences took place between January 2009 and August 2010.
Daniel Cruise, 48, has been jailed for four years and four months while his wife, 43, was given two years.
He admitted perverting the course of justice, causing or inciting a child to engage under 13 in sexual activity and 25 counts of taking or making indecent photographs of children. His wife, known by some by her middle name Tracy, admitted sexual assault of a child under 13.
The couple had since moved from Luckham Road and Barbara Cruise moved to Whetstone in Leicester before she was jailed.
Simon Jones, prosecuting at Bournemouth Crown Court, said police arrived at their house on June 12 this year and Barbara Cruise opened the door before going upstairs to the bedroom where her husband was.
He said: “DVDs were under the bed and both defendants were in the locked room where Daniel Cruise destroyed six DVDs.
“DC Laura Julier could hear the sound of cracking plastic from outside the bedroom door.”
Mr Jones said Daniel Cruise took a picture of his wife sexually assaulting a child and when Mr Jones described her involvement a loud gasp came from the public gallery, full of local parents.
Mr Jones said Daniel Cruise took four pictures of the girl that they had abused.
On his computer officers found downloaded indecent images, five of which were grade five, the most serious grade.
He had 482 grade four images, 512 grade three images, 138 grade two images and 7,090 grade one images.
David Richards, in mitigation for Daniel Cruise, said he had earlier been subjected to physical and sexual abuse himself.
Isabelle Gillard, for Barbara Cruise, said she was a mother of six, having had four children with Daniel Cruise.
Judge Peter Johnson told the pair their conduct had been “outrageous”.
“No other word will suffice and the public are outraged by what you did.”
The couple must sign onto the sexual offenders register and are now subject to a sexual offence order.
Detective Constable Laura Julier said: “Daniel and Barbara Cruise groomed a vulnerable family and their equally vulnerable child – their actions were shocking and utterly inexcusable. The couple were arrested after a warrant was executed at their home address during a ‘day of action’ organised by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP).”
‘Not happy with prison term length’
A GROUP of mothers who know Daniel and Barbara Cruise were in court to see them jailed.
But afterwards they told the Daily Echo how they were not happy with the length of their jail terms.
One mum said: “That’s all they get for wrecking people’s lives? That’s disgusting.”
Another said: “I’m just sickened.”
“They could at least have got 10 years, what about that little girl.”
Comments(70)
pete woodley
says...
9:27am Wed 26 Sep 12
pete woodley
says...
9:28am Wed 26 Sep 12
BH_Sherlock
says...
10:01am Wed 26 Sep 12
Their children's futures have been shattered by their totally unacceptable, heinous and quite most despicable actions.
What is more concerning, is that the legal system feel two years imprisonment is an appropriate sentence for a person who has abused a very small child. That Child's life is potentially ruined, a lot of care and support will be needed to reduce or prevent any long term affects, two years in prison with all the luxuries is no punishment. She and he, will be in a secure block under constant watch, where is the justice in this, why has the legal system let us down again.
Those poor children who were involved in this didn't ask, didn't want this to happen but all they'll likely to get is some counselling!
Bring back capital punishment for these heinous crimes.
Old Colonial
says...
10:06am Wed 26 Sep 12
pete woodley wrote:Crown Court Pete. Not the Magistrates. The problem goes right to the top.
Dont blame the police, blame the magistrates.Same old story,pussyfooting time and again.
Blue_eyes
says...
10:15am Wed 26 Sep 12
High Treason
says...
10:22am Wed 26 Sep 12
Time we built enough basic prisons without any luxuries and no time off for behaving. Simply add time if they don't behave.
pete woodley
says...
10:26am Wed 26 Sep 12
Old Colonial wrote:Yes of course.Far too many dogooders.
pete woodley wrote:Crown Court Pete. Not the Magistrates. The problem goes right to the top.
Dont blame the police, blame the magistrates.Same old story,pussyfooting time and again.
rudolph_hucker
says...
10:33am Wed 26 Sep 12
100% guarantee of no more offending.
Old Colonial
says...
10:47am Wed 26 Sep 12
afcb-mark
says...
10:48am Wed 26 Sep 12
Although the sentences are a joke why was the perverted witch only given half the sentence of the other paedo as it was proved via photographic evidence she sexually assaulted this poor kid.
Sick crime...sick sentences.
rudolph_hucker
says...
10:50am Wed 26 Sep 12
Old Colonial wrote:It is a separate crime, making indecent images of children.
It also appears, on reading, that the possession and taking of photographs justifies twice the sentence meted out for actual sexual assault! Implications?
I guess the thinking is it will be even harder for the victim dealing with what has happened, knowing that perverts out there are sharing and looking at images of your own abuse for their pleasure.
itsallgammon
says...
10:54am Wed 26 Sep 12
pete woodley wrote:I couldn't agree more. I hope they both are subjected to the same sort of treatment that they handed out to these innocents whilst "inside"
Old Colonial wrote:Yes of course.Far too many dogooders.
pete woodley wrote:Crown Court Pete. Not the Magistrates. The problem goes right to the top.
Dont blame the police, blame the magistrates.Same old story,pussyfooting time and again.
It seems strange that "justice", as I understand the term, is far more likely to be enacted by convicted criminals than Judges.
Yet another case of too much Law not enough Justice
pete woodley
says...
10:54am Wed 26 Sep 12
Loo_44
says...
11:02am Wed 26 Sep 12
rudolph_hucker
says...
11:40am Wed 26 Sep 12
Loo_44 wrote:If it was my child this happened too, they would be in their cold cold graves, and I would be in the dock
If it was my child this happened to I would be keeping a very close eye on when they come out of jail and let them know just how disgusting they are...
BournemouthMum
says...
11:49am Wed 26 Sep 12
Blue_eyes
says...
11:56am Wed 26 Sep 12
fifty shades of brown envelopes
says...
11:58am Wed 26 Sep 12
I think we will need a hod full not 2
i hate do-gooders
says...
11:59am Wed 26 Sep 12
Niki1
says...
11:59am Wed 26 Sep 12
Blue_eyes wrote:I could not agree with you more. What this pair have done is absolutely vile and their poor children will have to live with this for the rest of their lives.
I feel very sorry for their children, to find out that your parents are pedophiles must be devastating
umadtho
says...
12:08pm Wed 26 Sep 12
I couldn't care less if these two rotted in jail for the rest of their lives. I feel so very sorry for their children, who through no fault of their own have been torn away from everything they know. I doubt very much they fully understand what has happened and I hope to god that none of them see today's paper with a picture of their mother plastered across the front page with the headline "Pervert".
umadtho
says...
12:10pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Finbarr Finkelstein
says...
12:19pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Who was in charge of his botched
Raid?
Ps
Apart from that well done
teri10
says...
12:21pm Wed 26 Sep 12
BournemouthMum
says...
12:25pm Wed 26 Sep 12
umadtho wrote:Yes it's absolutely awful for the children that their "mother" is on the front page of the Echo. She should have thought of that before engaging in such activity. No, it's not an excuse to say that she was manipulated into it. If I was with a man and I found he was involved in the abuse of children - by whatever means (downloaded photos or actual abuse) any feelings I had for him would turn to revulsion and I would go straight to the police about him.
Tracy or rather Barbara was given a more lenient sentence because she said she was manipulated by Daniel and forced to engage in this kind of behaviour which is clearly no excuse. This article doesn't quite tell the whole story and Daniel was more involved than is detailed here. The grading of the images he had in his possession should explain why he was given a tougher (albeit still ridiculously short) sentence.
I couldn't care less if these two rotted in jail for the rest of their lives. I feel so very sorry for their children, who through no fault of their own have been torn away from everything they know. I doubt very much they fully understand what has happened and I hope to god that none of them see today's paper with a picture of their mother plastered across the front page with the headline "Pervert".
They should have been given much longer sentences.
BIGTONE
says...
12:40pm Wed 26 Sep 12
teri10 wrote:I think the CPS/RCPO guide book needs ripping up. That would be a start.
Typical of our so called 'justice' system! That poor child will be scarred for life mentally & these bastards will be out b4 you know it to do the same again. I have a friend who is a police sergeant & he said it really **** them off when they do their job catching these sort of people & then the courts give them pathetic sentences such as this!!! Wonder if these Judges would be so lenient if it was one of their own kids?!
http://www.cps.gov.u
k/legal/s_to_u/
umadtho
says...
12:42pm Wed 26 Sep 12
mgibbs
says...
12:58pm Wed 26 Sep 12
umadtho wrote:Offenders sentenced to a prison term of30 months or more for a sexual offence must always be placed on the sex offenders register for life. For prison sentences of less than 30 months, but longer than 6. The offender must sign the register for 10 years, and for prison sentences of less than 6 months, the period is 7 years. This applies to the sentence they were handed, not time served, and also applies to suspended prison sentences.
What I don't get is why she only has to be on the sex offenders register for 10 years and he for life? That's confused me no end.
umadtho
says...
1:01pm Wed 26 Sep 12
mgibbs wrote:I understand that, what I meant by it's confused me is that surely if you're a sex offender, then you're a sex offender, regardless of how many years you are serving. It's a little scary.
umadtho wrote:Offenders sentenced to a prison term of30 months or more for a sexual offence must always be placed on the sex offenders register for life. For prison sentences of less than 30 months, but longer than 6. The offender must sign the register for 10 years, and for prison sentences of less than 6 months, the period is 7 years. This applies to the sentence they were handed, not time served, and also applies to suspended prison sentences.
What I don't get is why she only has to be on the sex offenders register for 10 years and he for life? That's confused me no end.
Richard Head
says...
1:01pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Then Daniel Cruise, of all people should know that, being subjected to sexual abuse at an early age would have repercussions later. That was his defence, but it didn't stop him carrying on with his vile acts despite his knowledge through experience, that it would possibly damage his victim in later life.
I have to say that, surely , some of the blame must go to the out of touch judges.
umadtho
says...
1:17pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Richard Head wrote:Unfortunately, Judges don't make the law, they apply the facts of a case to the law and then dish out a sentence that has been set in precedent.
David Richards, in mitigation for Daniel Cruise, said he had earlier been subjected to physical and sexual abuse himself.
Then Daniel Cruise, of all people should know that, being subjected to sexual abuse at an early age would have repercussions later. That was his defence, but it didn't stop him carrying on with his vile acts despite his knowledge through experience, that it would possibly damage his victim in later life.
I have to say that, surely , some of the blame must go to the out of touch judges.
Pablo23
says...
1:24pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Surely they effectively commited the same crime as each other so should get comparable sentences?!
dommyball
says...
1:42pm Wed 26 Sep 12
To me the sentence seems way too lenient, I don't think there is any justification for lenient sentences due to not enough prison space.
The economy, especially the construction sector needs a help why not get building some new prisons? even some of the prisoners could be used for the unskilled hard labour!
dommyball
says...
1:48pm Wed 26 Sep 12
rudolph_hucker wrote:I'm afraid to say i would be with you on this one - I would make it my life long mission to seek my own personal justice..
Loo_44 wrote: If it was my child this happened to I would be keeping a very close eye on when they come out of jail and let them know just how disgusting they are...If it was my child this happened too, they would be in their cold cold graves, and I would be in the dock
Clarrie
says...
2:13pm Wed 26 Sep 12
rudolph_hucker
says...
2:16pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Richard Head wrote:Hopefully Cruise will be subjected to some more sexual abuse in prison.
David Richards, in mitigation for Daniel Cruise, said he had earlier been subjected to physical and sexual abuse himself. Then Daniel Cruise, of all people should know that, being subjected to sexual abuse at an early age would have repercussions later. That was his defence, but it didn't stop him carrying on with his vile acts despite his knowledge through experience, that it would possibly damage his victim in later life. I have to say that, surely , some of the blame must go to the out of touch judges.
With a mop handle.
Then he can really relive his childhood.
clarease
says...
2:43pm Wed 26 Sep 12
clarease
says...
2:44pm Wed 26 Sep 12
justanoldie
says...
2:45pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Dancer94
says...
3:13pm Wed 26 Sep 12
s-pb2
says...
3:21pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Sutcliffe-Keenan & Blackshaw's crime was not related to children, neither did they hurt someone, they didnt even take anything that wasnt theirs. Their crime was to go on Facebook last August and say they wanted to have a riot. No one listened.
Judges in this country therefore feel that doing the equivalent of going out into the street and shouting 'Lets Have A Riot' and no one paying the slightest bit of attention, is twice more evil and twice more heinous a crime then sexually abusing children and distributing images of that abuse. The judiciary in this country is rotten to the core. It is politically driven, and does not have the interests of the victims at heart. It is time to make judges accountable for their actions. Decisions like this make the time even closer that judges would be serving the people of this country. Lenient judgements like this show how out of touch the judiciary is, and it needs to be overhauled and reviewed from the very top.
Id like to give recognition also to the police and other professionals who would have dealt with this sickening case. Many here are often quick to criticise, but without them these children would have continued to be subjected to this awful abuse.
ooooch!
says...
3:38pm Wed 26 Sep 12
umadtho wrote:Anyone who had the misfortune to know Tracy/Barbara will know she would never be manipulated. Her personality was as big as the rest of her.
Tracy or rather Barbara was given a more lenient sentence because she said she was manipulated by Daniel and forced to engage in this kind of behaviour which is clearly no excuse. This article doesn't quite tell the whole story and Daniel was more involved than is detailed here. The grading of the images he had in his possession should explain why he was given a tougher (albeit still ridiculously short) sentence.
I couldn't care less if these two rotted in jail for the rest of their lives. I feel so very sorry for their children, who through no fault of their own have been torn away from everything they know. I doubt very much they fully understand what has happened and I hope to god that none of them see today's paper with a picture of their mother plastered across the front page with the headline "Pervert".
ooooch!
says...
3:50pm Wed 26 Sep 12
umadtho wrote:no she wasn't a teaching assistant, she had worked for some time in the pre-school and got involved in plenty of school activities in the first and junior schools. Now we know why. Sickening beyond belief
Also, she wasn't a teaching assistant.
pete woodley
says...
4:35pm Wed 26 Sep 12
hamworthygirl
says...
4:42pm Wed 26 Sep 12
rudolph_hucker wrote:I like this post
Anyone who abuses kids in this way should be lined up and shot, end of.
100% guarantee of no more offending.
manyogie
says...
4:56pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Old Colonial wrote:Its well past time we followed america and installed minimum sentancing to stop this unequality between, what is no more than, personal judgement.
pete woodley wrote:Crown Court Pete. Not the Magistrates. The problem goes right to the top.
Dont blame the police, blame the magistrates.Same old story,pussyfooting time and again.
Criminals need a bar set, if you do X , the sentance is Y, with NO allowances ref status, sex or any medical issues.
Now, the question is, how do we get this passed.
B.F.G
says...
4:57pm Wed 26 Sep 12
nothingtofear
says...
5:16pm Wed 26 Sep 12
BmouthGirl wrote:Unfortunately, it's far worse than you state because it's not just one innocent life that has been ruined. This vermin had around 8,000 photographs of varying degrees of depravity and every single child in these pictures is a victim too. Every last one of them. But you are dead right. They should have been put away for far longer.
Four years? For ruining an innocent life? Four year? Disgusting. They are sick and should be sent away for much longer
TheRealMedia
says...
6:22pm Wed 26 Sep 12
WickedWillow1
says...
7:00pm Wed 26 Sep 12
ooooch!
says...
7:06pm Wed 26 Sep 12
hamworthygirl wrote:I like this post too
rudolph_hucker wrote:I like this post
Anyone who abuses kids in this way should be lined up and shot, end of.
100% guarantee of no more offending.
umadtho
says...
7:20pm Wed 26 Sep 12
ooooch! wrote:Hahaha. Ouch indeed.
umadtho wrote:Anyone who had the misfortune to know Tracy/Barbara will know she would never be manipulated. Her personality was as big as the rest of her.
Tracy or rather Barbara was given a more lenient sentence because she said she was manipulated by Daniel and forced to engage in this kind of behaviour which is clearly no excuse. This article doesn't quite tell the whole story and Daniel was more involved than is detailed here. The grading of the images he had in his possession should explain why he was given a tougher (albeit still ridiculously short) sentence.
I couldn't care less if these two rotted in jail for the rest of their lives. I feel so very sorry for their children, who through no fault of their own have been torn away from everything they know. I doubt very much they fully understand what has happened and I hope to god that none of them see today's paper with a picture of their mother plastered across the front page with the headline "Pervert".
I agree, she always came across as a right gobby cow. This just goes to show that you never know what is going on behind closed doors.
No-one managed to get a picture of him I take it? I agree both need to be named and shamed for what they did, I just hope for their kids sake that their foster parents have managed to shield them from this.
lelbel
says...
7:41pm Wed 26 Sep 12
Bethyboo
says...
8:08pm Wed 26 Sep 12
ASM
says...
12:16am Thu 27 Sep 12
No doubt they will be pretected in prison and well looked after and when theyre out again in a couple of years they will do it again
pete woodley
says...
9:00am Thu 27 Sep 12
stevobath
says...
12:13pm Thu 27 Sep 12
itsallgammon wrote:They'll probably be on the 'Rule 43s Wing' for protection.However lets hope they get 'stranded' somewhere in the nick some real justice can be meeted out.
pete woodley wrote:I couldn't agree more. I hope they both are subjected to the same sort of treatment that they handed out to these innocents whilst "inside"
Old Colonial wrote:Yes of course.Far too many dogooders.
pete woodley wrote:Crown Court Pete. Not the Magistrates. The problem goes right to the top.
Dont blame the police, blame the magistrates.Same old story,pussyfooting time and again.
It seems strange that "justice", as I understand the term, is far more likely to be enacted by convicted criminals than Judges.
Yet another case of too much Law not enough Justice
yummymummyof4
says...
2:12pm Thu 27 Sep 12
How is this justice its just a joke, in a few years they will be released and get on with there lives while the children grow up living in fear
umadtho
says...
2:55pm Thu 27 Sep 12
pete woodley wrote:It was exposed due to a nationwide investigation into a child **** ring. In total 76 people were arrested all over the country in the same night. It is thought that Tracy and Daniel were released pending further investigation and then they found the pictures of the little girl they had looked after. They were then re-arrested and Tracy was bailed in August to her home town of Leicester. Daniel remained in Dorchester until last Fridays court appearance.
Its a very sick story,and once again i say well done to who ever exposed them,could the echo give more details,in case other members of the public have other concerns.
pete woodley
says...
7:04pm Thu 27 Sep 12
t organisation.Have they a phone number.
umadtho
says...
7:35pm Thu 27 Sep 12
pete woodley wrote:It was organised by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP). I don't have a number but the power of Google night help you.
Thanks umadtho,but who started the investigation,ie,wha
t organisation.Have they a phone number.
If you have any queries regarding your children and this couple, you should contact the police at Bournemouth. They'll be able to set your mind at rest.
pete woodley
says...
7:37pm Thu 27 Sep 12
Yankee1
says...
11:56pm Thu 27 Sep 12
Just has a way of finding itself, even if the system won't.
Yankee1
says...
11:56pm Thu 27 Sep 12
Justice has a way of finding itself, even if the system won't.
Adrian XX
says...
9:18am Fri 28 Sep 12
To those who say 'if it were my child, I would kill him'. I hope you would see common sense and not let your rage override rational thought. There is every chance a young child can recover completely from this and go on to live a normal life, but this would not happen if one of the child's parents were in jail. A child who has been abused needs a lot of support - the act of killing the perpetrator would end up being worse for the child than the original abuse.
dommyball
says...
12:39pm Fri 28 Sep 12
umadtho
says...
2:40pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Adrian XX wrote:I wouldn't have said "harsh"... Granted the sentence is in line with what has been dished out in similar cases. That, unfortunately is the system of precedent that is our legal system. However, I don't think that if you are given 10 years that you should only have to serve 4. This is the case with Danny. Each of the grading of those pictures is taken into account separately, and by my calculations, that equates to 10 years... He is only having to serve 4 years, 4 months. If you get 10, you should serve 10. End of.
I don't think four years is low in today's climate at all. In fact, considering some convicted of manslaughter get a lighter sentence, this sentence is quite harsh. And we've never had the death penalty for this kind of offence. Since there is no political will to bring it back even for murder, it is never going to be in place for sex offenders.
To those who say 'if it were my child, I would kill him'. I hope you would see common sense and not let your rage override rational thought. There is every chance a young child can recover completely from this and go on to live a normal life, but this would not happen if one of the child's parents were in jail. A child who has been abused needs a lot of support - the act of killing the perpetrator would end up being worse for the child than the original abuse.
With respect to you saying that the child involved will get over it... I really hope you're right but to make that assumption is ridiculous. Even if she "gets over it" there will always be scars that no human being should have to live with because of someone else's actions.
Adrian XX
says...
3:58pm Fri 28 Sep 12
With respect to you saying that the child involved will get over it... I really hope you're right but to make that assumption is ridiculous. Even if she "gets over it" there will always be scars that no human being should have to live with because of someone else's actions.
I didn't say it was certain and using the phrase "get over it" makes it sound like she can just snap out of it by herself, which I don't believe. She will need a lot of help and definitely the support of her parents, but one should not assume she is doomed for life.
umadtho
says...
4:25pm Fri 28 Sep 12
Adrian XX wrote:I wasn't being literal, as you're not by insinuating any one has said "She'll be doomed for life"... TOUCHÉ!
With respect to you saying that the child involved will get over it... I really hope you're right but to make that assumption is ridiculous. Even if she "gets over it" there will always be scars that no human being should have to live with because of someone else's actions.
I didn't say it was certain and using the phrase "get over it" makes it sound like she can just snap out of it by herself, which I don't believe. She will need a lot of help and definitely the support of her parents, but one should not assume she is doomed for life.
I just think it is hard for people to get their heads around such a light sentencing... Any 'normal' person doesn't see those pictures as pictures, they see them as a poor child that has been abused whether by this couple or someone else. It's happening and tougher sentencing should be sought for crimes such as this.
The irony of the "I hope they get abused and die etc" hasn't gone unnoticed here though. It's like Ian Huntley being on Facebook all over again.
BmouthGirl says...
9:21am Wed 26 Sep 12