A transgender paedophile who repeatedly used female aliases on dating sites and pornography websites without notifying police has been jailed for nine months at Teesside Crown Court. Luke Hardy, 24, who identifies as Zoe and was referred to using female pronouns during sentencing, breached Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPO) on multiple occasions between 2023 and July 2025.
The court heard that Hardy, of Yarm Lane, Stockton, had been designated a “high risk sex offender” by police following a 2022 conviction for three counts of making indecent images of children. Eight of the images found on Hardy’s mobile phone were of the most serious category, leading to the imposition of the original SHPO alongside a community order.
Judge Richard Clews told the defendant that the breaches of the Sexual Harm Prevention Order were “persistent and deliberate”, though he acknowledged no direct harm had been caused to others through the violations.
Pattern of Non-Compliance with Court Orders
Prosecutor Saba Shan outlined a series of breaches beginning in 2023, when Hardy violated the order by deleting internet history from a mobile phone and removing dating applications from the device. These actions directly contravened the SHPO provisions, which require offenders to maintain accessible records of their online activities.
Later that year, Hardy committed a further breach by registering on a pornography website using the name “Lucy” without informing police about the alias. The court heard that Hardy had told officers about sexuality struggles at the time, describing “sometimes feeling like Luke, sometimes like Lucy.
The most recent breach occurred in July when police visited Hardy’s Stockton home and discovered the use of another undeclared alias, “Zoe”, across multiple platforms. Officers found the name had been used on a dating application, an email account, and a mobile game, all without the required notification to authorities.
Understanding Sexual Harm Prevention Orders
Sexual Harm Prevention Orders are court-imposed restrictions designed to protect the public from individuals who pose a risk of sexual harm. Under the terms of these orders, offenders must notify police of any aliases used online and maintain accessible records of their internet activity for monitoring purposes.
The orders, which replaced the previous Sexual Offences Prevention Orders in 2015, can include wide-ranging prohibitions tailored to individual cases. Common requirements include restrictions on internet use, prohibitions on contact with children, and mandatory disclosure of online aliases to enable effective monitoring by authorities.
Breaching a SHPO constitutes a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. The orders typically last for a minimum of five years but can be imposed indefinitely, with breaches treated as serious violations of public protection measures.
Sentencing and Activation of Suspended Sentences
Judge Clews imposed an eight-month sentence for the SHPO breaches, with an additional month added through the partial activation of previous suspended sentences. The total nine-month custodial term reflects both the persistence of the breaches and Hardy’s criminal history.
The case highlighted the challenges authorities face in monitoring sex offenders’ online activities, particularly when aliases are used across multiple platforms. The requirement to declare all online identities forms a crucial part of the monitoring regime designed to prevent reoffending.
Hardy appeared on the court list under the legal name Luke Hardy but was addressed using female pronouns throughout the proceedings, reflecting the defendant’s gender identity as Zoe Hardy. The court made no comment on this aspect of the case, focusing solely on the breaches of the legal orders.
High-Risk Designation and Monitoring Challenges
The designation of Hardy as a “high risk sex offender” had prompted increased monitoring by police, leading to the July home visit that uncovered the latest breaches. This classification typically results from assessments of reoffending risk and compliance history.
Sexual Harm Prevention Orders have become an increasingly important tool in managing convicted sex offenders in the community. The orders allow authorities to impose restrictions that might seem excessive for the general public but are deemed necessary given an individual’s previous offending behaviour.
The case underscores the ongoing challenges faced by police and probation services in monitoring compliance with such orders, particularly as technology and online platforms continue to evolve. The use of multiple aliases across different platforms can complicate tracking efforts and potentially facilitate contact with vulnerable individuals.
Legal Framework and Public Protection
Under current legislation, SHPOs can be imposed at the time of sentencing or applied for separately by police when concerns arise about an individual’s behaviour. The orders must be tailored to address specific risks posed by the offender and are subject to regular review.
Those subject to SHPOs also face automatic registration requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, commonly known as being on the sex offenders register. This requires regular reporting to police and notification of any changes in personal circumstances, including addresses and travel plans.
The breach of such orders is taken seriously by the courts as it undermines the entire framework designed to protect the public from sexual harm. Even technical breaches, such as failing to declare an alias with no evidence of attempted contact with potential victims, can result in custodial sentences.
Hardy’s case serves as a reminder of the stringent monitoring requirements placed on convicted sex offenders and the serious consequences of non-compliance. The nine-month sentence reflects the court’s view that persistent breaches, even without direct harm to others, warrant significant punishment to maintain the integrity of public protection measures.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
