A convicted sex-offender detained following a paedophile hunter sting in County Tyrone has been returned for trial.
Jonathan Dowds (43) from Shandon Park, Omagh is charged with attempting to sexually communicate with a child he thought was a 13-year-old girl and attempting to incite a child to engage in sexual activity.
Offending is alleged to have occurred between 31 March and 8 April this year.
During a committal hearing at Omagh Magistrates Court a prosecuting lawyer said there is a case to answer which was agreed by District Judge Peter Magill.
Dowds spoke only to confirm his identity and that he understood the charges against him.
He declined to call witnesses or give evidence on his own behalf at this stage in proceedings.
Judge Magill ordered him to appear for arraignment at Dungannon Crown Court on 7 January.
When the case first reached court a police officer previously explained a report was received from a group called Children Survivors Online Protection Team who had confronted Dowds and held evidence he had been “attempting to groom a 13-year-old child in England”.
A team member handed officers a large amount of documentation containing photographs and messages allegedly exchanged between Dowds and what he thought was a child but was in fact a decoy.
He was arrested and when shown the messages during interview, admitting sending them all.
Dowds accepted initiating contact in an online chat forum “not realising it was a trap.”
The conversation then moved to another forum and he admitted, believing he was talking with a 13-year-old girl and accepted the messages he sent were of a sexual nature.
He told police his intention was “to educate this young girl to be ready for adulthood but understood this was not acceptable”.
Objecting to bail at the time the officer said Dowds does not have a suitable address as his current tenancy has been revoked by NI Housing Executive and “has actually already been boarded up. It is understood there will be no alternative address in the immediate future.”
The officer pointed to Dowds previous similar convictions and while these were some time ago, “They are relevant and support the assertion of a risk of reoffending.”
A defence barrister accepted the charges are very serious in nature against a previous record and “It appears clear this offending has reemerged. However, this was non-contact offending and it’s not suggested the defendant in any way attempted to secure a meeting, which is sometimes how these matters come to light. Instead, it was a conversation and for that reason it would be possible to impose conditions to allow management on bail, including no access to internet-capable devices. He has never reoffended while on bail in the past.”
The defence added, “While a custodial sentence is a distinct possibility for offending of this nature, it is not an inevitability. When these cases go before crown court, the benefits of rehabilitation alternatives to custody will be looked at. If the defendant is remanded for a lengthy period of time the likelihood is any rehabilitative period will be to a very limited extent. In addition, any custodial sentence would be relatively short.”
The application was thrown out at that stage with a judge remarking, “There’s a relevant history and the risk of further offending is too great. I’m also refusing bail on the necessity to protect the public.”
Dowds remained in custody for a time but bail was later granted with conditions including no contact with any child unless approved by Social Services and residence at an address agreed with police.
