On 7 November 2024 Thames Valley Police had been conducting an investigation on a phone that had been seized from a registered sex offender. A conversation thread was found on X, formerly known as Twitter, between the sex offender and an account which was later discovered to have been created by Jonathan Le Tocq.
The name of the account was potentially linked to a known person, but it had been closed down before Guernsey Police could access it.
It had been created in August 2024 and was followed by 462 users on the platform.
Le Tocq had posted 800 posts since its creation. The conversation thread consisted of 139 messages, dating back to September 2024, conversing in a sexual nature while in character.
‘It was apparent that the defendant was using several X accounts to upload indecent material which appeared to have been generating using AI or similar software. The accounts were active and frequently engaged with other X users,’ said Crown Advocate Chris Dunford.
The police investigation focused on four accounts which the defendant had created in the names of four females, one with a family connection to Le Tocq and the others known to him.
The court was told that Le Tocq was using 29 accounts on X under various names.
Using the telecoms network to send indecent messages
Charges: Le Tocq faced seven counts of sending an indecent message by means of the telecoms network.
The offending started in November 2016 when Le Tocq created an Instagram account in which he pretended to be a female named Henrietta in her 60s, and another of a man named ‘Wills’. He uploaded posts about sexual fantasies and stories of sexual relationships, and posts relating to the real women who he would go on to create X accounts for later. He uploaded pictures from their social media pages.
The Henrietta account did not involve any AI-generated images.
One conversation with another account took place over the course of a year and described sexual interaction that his alter ego Wills had with children. He wrote accounts which included significant detail of sexual encounters, with under-age girls being taught various acts.
No images were recovered by the police and were potentially deleted by Le Tocq, so the full content was not known.
Another account on X created on 15 November 2023, which was set to be private, was set up to pose as a retired sex and relationship therapist couple.
Le Tocq posted 224 tweets from the account, including deepfake naked images of at least 12 females along with comments.
Some of the posts contained extreme pornographic content, and it also included content of a local woman.
The email address associated with this account was also linked to numerous X accounts was located on Le Tocq’s electronic devices.
Another account was set to private and had 181 followers and 946 tweets had been posted. Explicit fake images were posted of at least 44 different females.
Two deepfake images of another local victim was posted on 18 December 2024 along with some sexual talk.
Le Tocq posted a deepfake image of two of his victims sat together wearing lingerie, with a message about how they would be involved in group sex.
Victim I had a deepfake image posted of her in a bikini, with a message from Le Tocq about various sex acts with her.
On another account, he posted about a fantasy trip to Manila with a woman called Maya. They were later joined by a female who was known to him and he posted content involving images depicting bondage and domination.
On 25 May 2024, Le Tocq engaged in a private chat with another X user who commented that they loved his reports with Maya.
Le Tocq replied that Maya was underage, and he used the account to post more than 40 relevant sexual images, along with explicit descriptions.
In May 2025, Le Tocq posted two images of a female under 16 who was known to him.
On another account, followed by 37 people, a true profile picture of another woman known to him was uploaded.
He uploaded the first post on 14 May 2025 and initial posts contained genuine photos of her, her husband and her daughter in a family photograph, obtained from the woman’s social media accounts.
Within the week the posts became more explicit, and at times he superimposed his face on the images.
Another local victim had a fake account using her personal images created on 16 May 2025.
It included her date of birth and full name. It was followed by 121 people and was made both public and private at times.
Le Tocq uploaded fake images of the woman performing sex acts.
On 25 May he uploaded a photo of a male with his own face superimposed on it, holding the face of a woman who was tied up.
Le Tocq continued to upload to that account until four days before his arrest in July, said Advocate Dunford.
Another X account in the nickname of a woman known to him, used true images to begin with. Within a week he had posted 14 explicit images and content, including nude photographs.
Making indecent images and pseudo indecent images of a child
Charges: Making a pseudo indecent image of a child – a minimum of 230 Category A images
Making a pseudo indecent image of a child – a minimum of 486 Category B images
Making a pseudo indecent image of a child – a minimum of 1,731 Category C images
Making an indecent image of a child – a minimum of 13 Category A images
Making an indecent image of a child – a minimum of 10 Category B images
Making an indecent image of a child – a minimum of 10 Category C images.
Le Tocq used the application Retake which uses AI to completely change the face of an original image and replace it with another person.
The images where the victims were posed were obtained from pornographic websites, including OnlyFans.
Photographs of the women originated from their personal social media accounts, and Advocate Dunford said that Le Tocq had then used several images of a number of children known to him to create the images he posted.
A fourth female child, who is now an adult, was photographed wearing her primary school uniform, an image used to create an explicit image.
Le Tocq uploaded true images of the children to nudify websites, which removes the individuals’ clothing and created nude images of them.
The faces of the children were also edited onto images of women in explicit pornographic material, making them pseudo images.
Advocate Dunford gave examples to the court where Le Tocq had superimposed his own face in the images along with those of children.
The minimum number of pseudo images created by Le Tocq was 230 of category A, the most serious category, 486 of category B and 1,731 of category C.
‘A relevant factor in Guernsey law is whether the image is first-generation, which means they were created by the defendant,’ said Advocate Dunford.
The number of non-pseudo indecent images of children was 33 in total, 13 category A, 10 category B and 10 category C.
In terms of distributing a pseudo image of a child, Le Tocq uploaded 10 pseudo images of a real female child thought to be aged eight-to-12 to photo sharing platform Flickr. He had nudified the images so the child appeared naked.
None of the images were made public on the site, however one image was uploaded to a public gallery, meaning it was accessible to anyone.
Le Tocq used one of his online accounts to comment on the image.
The image was category C, not a local person and was not a first-generation image.
Extreme pornography
Charge: Possession of 218 extreme pornographic images
On Le Tocq’s devices, 218 images of extreme pornography were found, often involving implements of torture.
Interviews
Le Tocq’s first interview with police was on 21 July last year. Le Tocq said that while on a work trip to Brussels, he was introduced by an acquaintance to the idea of altering images. He said he had a long-standing issue with viewing pornography.
He said it was due to the stress of his position in the States and he gained release and an adrenaline high from altering images of women he found online.
‘He confirmed that he would replace the facial images of those with females known to him. He explained he created several accounts on social media in the names of females known to him and used them to post sexual images and stories of sexual fantasies,’ said Advocate Dunford.
‘He said he got no sexual gratification from doing this and did not have sexual feelings towards those identified.’
Le Tocq said he was sorry and ashamed by the content he posted online and that it was very much a fantasy, relieving him of the stress of some other parts of his life.
Le Tocq was interviewed again on 22 August and exercised his right to silence.
When shown the image of a sex act with faces superimposed, he said he felt shocked and was in disbelief that he could have done that.
He entered guilty pleas in court on 4 December.