AN UPSKIRT pervert who filmed 250 victims in Worcester and even a couple having sex in their own home has been spared jailed.

Richard Whyley brought a large hold-all for his anticipated jail sentence but in the end he did not need it, walking free at Worcester Crown Court yesterday with his face hidden behind a grey hood.

The camera-shy pervert used a GoPro camera hidden inside an adapted boot to film the genitals and buttocks of women and girls in Worcester and Malvern while working as a University of Worcester subcontractor.

In total the engineer took 6,436 images between June 26 and August 15, 2019, his campaign of depravity only coming to an end when a 16-year-old girl raised the alarm after he took a photo up her skirt after following her onto an escalator at a shop in Worcester High Street.

Of these images, 5,568 were images of females he had taken including of their buttocks and genitals. There was no evidence any of the images had been shared or distributed to others. The victims, aside from the one who caught Whyley in the act, may never be known.

The 32-year-old of Lavender Lane, Stourbridge, admitted voyeurism, two charges of recording an image under clothing to observe without consent and operating equipment beneath the clothing of another without consent.

Judge Martin Jackson, who sentenced him to a three year community order, said: “This is not a soft option.”

The father-of-two showed no emotion as the sentence was announced and he walked free.

The young victim, who had been with her 10-year-old cousin at the time, raised the alarm when she heard the click of the defendant’s camera behind her on an escalator, telling her aunt and shop staff about her suspicions.

The police were also informed. The camera app was visible on Whyley's phone as he took the picture.

Jason Aris, prosecuting, said police tracked Whyley using Worcester City Centre's CCTV system, following his movements to a building owned by the University of Worcester. He was identified as a sub-contractor for the university testing fire alarms.

Police seized a number of mobile phones from the defendant before searching his vehicle where they found the GoPro camera.

Police also found an SD card which had 94 further images on it, filmed outside of two properties including photos of women either topless or in a state of undress. Three videos showed a couple engaged in sexual intercourse.

Mr Aris argued that this was raised harm within the sentencing guidelines as the couple had been filmed inside their own home. In terms of the upskirting he said culpability was raised because there had been a significant degree of planning. "Footwear has been altered and amended to enable the GoPro device to be stuck to it" he said.

However, he accepted mitigating features including the defendant entering a guilty plea at the earliest possible opportunity.

The victim who was filmed in the shop read out her victim personal statement from behind a screen, telling the court: "This incident has impacted every aspect of my life."

She felt unable to take her cousin out again after what happened and added: "I'm constantly looking over my shoulder."

She described suffering from sleepless nights, anxiety about being followed and worry about what would happen to her if she was by herself.

The victim also reported that she had become more conscious about what she wore. It had even had an impact on her choice of university.

Judge Jackson described how the defendant had 'pounced' on the victim in the High Street shop.

However, he also noted that the defendant had undertaken therapy voluntarily and tried to address the causes of his offending. "That leads me to the conclusion there is a realistic prospect of rehabilitation," he said.

Judge Jackson added: "It seems to me that this was something done for sexual gratification and you have accepted that by pleading guilty to the charges you face."

The maximum sentence he could impose for the voyeurism offence was one of two years in prison. The judge said, taken together, the offences were category one within the guidelines.

However, he said he he was not entirely sure that the defendant's understanding of the impact of his offending on others was 'fully developed'.

Judge Jackson placed him on a three year community order to include an accredited sex offenders programme.

Whyley was placed on an electronically monitored curfew between 9pm and 6am for four months and ordered him to pay £750 compensation to the one victim who has been identified.

Whyley was also placed on a sexual harm prevention order for five years which gives the police extra powers to monitor his use of electronic devices.

He is also subject to notification requirements as a convicted sex offender. The forfeiture and destruction of GoPro camera and SD card were also authorised.

The judge also ordered Whyley to pay £350 costs.