A man jailed for child grooming has been fined for being in possession of a mobile phone he didn’t tell the police about.

Craig Michael Arthur Forster, aged 31, of Littlemoor Road, Weymouth, was sentenced at Bournemouth Crown Court after earlier admitting being in breach of his Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO).

His order requires him to report all of his devices, including computers, mobile phones and tablets, to police within three days of acquiring them.

Anne Marie Garvie, prosecuting, said Forster was given a 16-month prison sentence in 2016 and handed a SHPO in connection with a grooming offence in which he attempted to meet a girl under 16. The defendant had one phone which was registered with the police. But police discovered that Forster was in possession of a second mobile phone they weren’t aware of after a meeting he had with his probation officer. He was then arrested, and a search of his home was undertaken.

Miss Garvie added: “Police were contacted, and the defendant was arrested. As a result of his arrest, a search was undertaken which revealed he was in possession of an Alcatel, another mobile phone, this had not been registered with police.”

The mobile phone was not found to contain anything illegal.

John Dyer, mitigating, said: “The only offending since his initial offending has been failure to report having the device which is prevented by the SHPO.

“He has made remarkable progress over the years. Apart from this very unattractive offence in 2015/2016, he has led a very blameless life. He spent 12 years as a chef in the Weymouth area, then in refuse collection. He then went to prison and since coming out has been training as a bricklayer.”

Judge Brian Forster QC told the defendant: “I know nothing of your previous case other than what I have been told. Usually the period of SHPO is the same as the reporting period. If I am right – in this case it would be 10 years. I don’t know if your solicitor has considered this aspect of this case. It may be possible to appeal the variation of the order, but I am not saying what result of the application would be. “I am clear you are doing extremely well, you should be proud of the progress you have made. The report outlines everything you have done. At the same time, it’s important that people understand that court orders are important, and this order was made for a purpose.

“Please continue to work with those helping you.”

Forster was fined £150 and must pay a victim surcharge of £30.