Sex offender claimed he had erectile dysfunction after he was caught exposing himself to an underage girl.

Sex Offender Exposed Himself to Underage Girl, Claims Erectile Dysfunction

Ian Maiden, 48, groomed and sent sexual messages to an underage girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons. Prosecutor Aisha Wadoodi described the incident where Maiden exposed himself: "He had his trousers down around his knees and was playing with his genitals."

Wadoodi detailed the sexually suggestive messages sent by Maiden: "He has called her beautiful and said he was jealous when she mentioned other boys. He told her in one message that she had the best bum she had ever seen and wouldn't mind being pinned down by her."

The girl's mother discovered the messages, including a photograph of Maiden's private parts, on her daughter's phone. She reported the matter to the police in December 2017.

During a police interview, Maiden denied performing a sex act in front of the girl. He claimed he was touching his genitals due to erectile dysfunction. "He said he didn't do it for sexual reasons, he did it because he was bored," said Wadoodi at Teesside Crown Court.

Maiden, formerly of Hartlepool, now of Blenheim Road, Doncaster, later admitted to sexual activity in the presence of a child and engaging in sexual communication with a child. This was his first conviction.

Stephen Constantine, defending Maiden, stated: "He is somewhat at a loss to explain why he behaved as he did. There is grooming-type behaviour. Clearly you're dealing with a man of good character, married with children himself. There have been consequences as far as his family are concerned. They are no longer a family because of Mr Maiden's behaviour."

Constantine added that Maiden had sought help to reduce the risk of repeating his actions: "He's obtained any help he could to reduce any risk of this ever happening again. There is work that can be done and he has expressed the willingness and desire to engage with it."

He noted the significant delay in the case, over two years, citing Maiden's interview two days after the offense but not being charged until two years later.

Judge Paul Watson QC addressed Maiden: "You, and the victim's family, have had to wait a considerable period of time - far too long - for this matter to end up here today. You did all you could, and so I take into account very much the delay in this case."

While sexual activity in the presence of a child carries a maximum sentence of 10 years, under sentencing guidelines, Maiden's offense would typically result in a four-month jail term, with two months served. The judge acknowledged this wouldn't allow for sexual offender treatment programs.

Judge Watson stated: "That clearly wouldn't provide any time whatsoever for any sexual offender treatment programme of any sort. You'd be released fairly soon from that sentence. You are not considered a danger to the public. It seems to me to be better for the public that you receive the benefit of a sex offender treatment programme."

Maiden was sentenced to a four-month jail term suspended for two years, with 25 days' rehabilitation activity. He was also subjected to a sexual harm prevention order banning unsupervised contact or communication with under-16s, restrictions on internet use, and placed on the sex offenders' register for 10 years.