## Repeat Offender Imprisoned for Failing to Disclose Mobile Phone and Address
A registered sex offender has been returned to jail after he deliberately withheld key information from authorities, violating terms intended to monitor and restrict his movements. The case serves as a stark reminder of the rigorous scrutiny imposed on those convicted of serious sexual offences—and the potential consequences of failing to comply.
Lewis Ware, aged 20 and living in the Broadway area of Cardiff, was sentenced to 40 weeks in prison at Cardiff Crown Court this week, after being found guilty of breaching both the Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) and the notification requirements applied to all sex offenders. Both sets of restrictions were put in place following his conviction in 2023 for communicating with someone he believed to be a 14-year-old girl—who turned out to be a police decoy.
The court was told that, as part of measures designed to protect the public, Ware was forbidden from owning a mobile phone without informing his assigned offender manager. The same order barred him from using encryption, concealing passwords and accessing social media applications such as Instagram and Snapchat, a particular concern in cases involving contact with minors or inappropriate online behaviour.
However, following his release from a previous custodial sentence in February 2025, Ware failed to report to police within the required three-day window and neglected to disclose his living arrangements. His attempt to avoid detection came to an end just over a week later, when his supervising officer visited his address and discovered a Samsung mobile phone which Ware had not previously declared.
During this visit, authorities asked Ware to unlock the device using his fingerprint—a standard procedure for monitoring offenders with restrictions over technology use. Prosecutor Abigail Jackson revealed Ware did not fully comply, refusing to apply his thumb properly, thus blocking access to the device. A brief inspection nonetheless showed that the phone contained several social media applications Ware was explicitly forbidden to use under the terms of his SHPO.
Ware later admitted his actions, pleading guilty to two counts of breaching the Sexual Harm Prevention Order, as well as the requirements to keep authorities up to date with his personal details. These failings followed a previous record that included convictions not only for indecent communications with a child but also assault by penetration and other sexual assaults—alongside a history of further breaches of court-imposed orders.
In mitigation, defence barrister David Pinnell informed the court that Ware faces significant cognitive challenges, reporting a reading age equivalent to a typical six-year-old child and diagnosing him with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). This, the court was told, may have contributed to his inability to follow strict reporting rules.
Nevertheless, Judge Eugene Egan determined that Ware’s pattern of non-compliance and risk to the public merited a custodial sentence, imposing a total term of 40 weeks imprisonment. The judge’s ruling reinforced the seriousness with which the justice system treats breaches of safeguarding orders, especially in repeat offenders.
Measures like Sexual Harm Prevention Orders and notification requirements for sex offenders form a vital part of the UK’s strategy to monitor and control those who present a continuing risk. In cases where offenders attempt to sidestep these restrictions, swift police action and effective prosecution are critical to maintaining public confidence and safety.
This latest case demonstrates the ongoing challenges faced by police and probation officers in supervising high-risk individuals in the community—a task requiring vigilance, clear procedures and, where necessary, decisive legal action. The court’s decision serves both as punishment and as a warning to others that such breaches will be dealt with robustly.
The case also spotlights the complexities confronting those with learning difficulties or behavioural disorders when navigating the criminal justice system. While such factors are routinely considered during sentencing, public safety remains paramount when there is evidence of persistent disregard for the law and imposed conditions.