35-year-old married woman jailed for two and a half years after grooming and sexually abusing 13-year-old boy

A housewife and mother-of-four, Emma Burton who had an illicit relationship with an underage boy after using her husband's company credit to buy him designer goods, has been jailed for over two years at Manchester Crown Court, UK.

The 35-year-old wept as the verdict was read, after failing to heed consistent warnings to back off from the 13-year-old teenager she met through family friends. 

After Emma bought him two iPhones, his parents became suspicious and warned her to back off but she ignored them, moving ahead to secretly exchange messages with the teenager on Snapchat.

In what can be described as every parents' nightmare, the affair was finally exposed after a shocking photo of Emma kissing their son was found on his iPad. The police were called but he ran away from home and informed them that he was in love and planning to make a life with her. Due to his refusal to help police, Emma was interviewed and bailed with conditions. 

Rather than desist from her actions, she went to spend a night with her victim at the luxury La Tour Hotel in Birmingham and took him on another shopping spree at the Trafford Centre near Manchester. Police however re-arrested Emma after officers spotted the pair in her BMW car and found their underwear in the back seat. She later admitted to sexual activity with a child, meeting a boy under 16 after grooming and arranging or facilitate travel of another person with a view to exploitation.

Her husband, whom she has a 14, 13, 10 and 6-year-old for, was in court supporting her as her lawyer claimed she started having issues after her father died. Before delivering the verdict, the Judge told her: 

'Again and again you were warned but you carried on. I form the view that you carried on because you came to the conclusion that the boy was under your spell. The parents confronted their son and there was a violent argument and he was running about wielding a knife that demonstrates just how disturbed a child can be as a result of your actions. That was the power you held over him. The family were distraught that they had lost their son to you. There is no evidence of anything sexual because your victim has refused to co-operate, but you were together for a considerable period of time and you should understand therefore just how disturbing conduct like this can have on the mind of a young person. You were of good character and I am satisfied that you are remorseful for your actions but this of course does cross the custody threshold and immediate custody must prevail.'