Gibraltar’s Senior Judge yesterday ordered Crown prosecutors to review their case against a man who admitted distributing “horrendous” child pornography over the internet.

Michael Klinkiewicz was due to have been sentenced in the Supreme Court after pleading guilty earlier this year to one charge of publishing obscene material.

But acting Chief Justice Anthony Dudley refused to proceed after learning that the evidence gathered during the investigation far exceeded the small sample used to charge the defendant.

Klinkiewicz had initially denied the offence but later admitted distributing 141 images stored on a laptop to one individual.

The court heard that police had seized several computers and found over 2000 images in total, but that most of them had not been categorised as part of the prosecution case.

The case hinged only on the sample from the laptop, the court heard.

Clearly unhappy, the judge said it was not clear whether photos had also been distributed from other computers, or to how many people.

“These are particularly serious offences and I will not sentence in a vacuum,” Mr Justice Dudley said.

The case also illustrates the glaring inadequacy of Gibraltar law in this context.

Despite the extreme nature of some of the images found on the computers, the only offence is their distribution.

“Unfortunately possession of these images is not an offence in this jurisdiction,” the Judge said. Klinkiewicz faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison.

The case dates back to late 2006, when police acting on intelligence raided Klinkiewicz’s home and his workplace at a local internet gambling company.

Forensic analysis of several computers found that images had been distributed and downloaded during online chat sessions.

Images of child pornography are ranked from level one to level five, five being the most extreme. The sample used by prosecutors contained several level four images.

Mr Justice Dudley said the number of images distributed and the number of persons to whom those images were sent would make “a world of difference” in sentencing.

“Clearly the number of images is a significant factor in this offence,” the Judge said.

“What we can’t forget is that underlying these horrendous images is the abuse of children.”

“Every image is another child being abused.”

“If you ask these other children if it’s significant, I think they would say yes.”

The case was adjourned to May 11 to allow time for the Crown to review the evidence in the case and decide how to proceed.