Grimsby Mum Who Claimed to Be 15 to Blackmail Men Walks Free With Suspended Sentence

A 24-year-old mother who extorted money from victims by distributing intimate photographs and subsequently claiming to be an underage girl has been handed a suspended prison sentence at Grimsby Crown Court.

Demi Sweatman, alongside her former partner Charlie Anderson, 22, used social media and dating platforms to lure targets before demanding cash under the threat of exposing them to their families. Despite a judge condemning the operation as 'disgraceful and nasty', the mother-of-three avoided immediate custody after providing prosecution evidence that led to Anderson's conviction.

Sweatman, of Werneth Road in Grimsby, Lincolnshire, received an 11-month prison sentence, suspended for 18 months. She was ordered to complete 100 hours of unpaid work and attend 15 Rehabilitation Activity Requirement days. Anderson, formerly of the same address, was given a 16-month sentence, suspended for two years, alongside 100 hours of unpaid work and 10 rehabilitation days.

Grimsby Mum Launches Online Blackmail Scheme

The court heard the offending began in May 2023 when Sweatman uploaded an image of herself in pink lingerie to Instagram, accompanied by a caption inviting users to 'Snap me'. After one man responded to the post, she offered to provide nude photographs for £20.

Following an initial exchange of images and money over WhatsApp, the victim asked if she wanted to meet in person. Sweatman replied, 'only if I get £50'—a sum the man subsequently paid.

At this point, the nature of the exchange shifted. Sweatman informed the victim she was a 15-year-old girl and threatened to alert his family and friends about the correspondence unless he transferred another £50. Her demands quickly escalated to £300. When the victim protested via message, Sweatman threatened to send associates to his home address unless further payments were made.

Grimsby Woman Repeats Extortion Scam During Bail

The man ultimately transferred more than £1,150, with £500 traced directly into an account belonging to Anderson. Humberside Police arrested the pair shortly after the incident was reported. Both denied the allegations and were released on bail while officers continued their investigation.

While on bail in October 2024, Sweatman committed a second offence using Facebook Dating. She posted a photograph offering further nude content, drawing a response from a student who transferred money for pornographic material.

Repeating her previous method, Sweatman acquired the young man's details, claimed to be 15, and threatened to expose him for soliciting the images. The student initially paid £40 for the photographs, followed by £250 after the threats began.

Partner Enters Guilty Plea Before Court Trial

Prosecutor Craig Lowe told the court the student contacted police, leading to Sweatman's second arrest. She again denied responsibility, while Anderson denied a related charge of money laundering. However, ahead of a scheduled trial, Sweatman supplied evidence to the prosecution, prompting Anderson to change his plea to guilty.

Mr Lowe noted both victims suffered anxiety and fear as a direct result of the extortion.

During mitigation, Tim Savage, representing Sweatman, highlighted that his client had no previous convictions and was a young mother of three children. He told the court Sweatman had been coerced by her partner and had not reoffended since October 2024.

Maya Hanson, defending Anderson, described the couple's relationship as 'volatile'. She stated her client had experienced a traumatic upbringing but was remorseful and eager to secure employment.

Judge Hands Suspended Sentence Over Disgraceful Offending

Sentencing the pair, Judge Gurdial Singh observed that victim payments were funnelled into Anderson's account due to the intense pressure placed upon the men.

'It was disgraceful and nasty offending,' Judge Singh said, noting that Sweatman had deliberately repeated the crime while under investigation.

However, the judge ruled that Sweatman's decision to provide evidence against Anderson entitled her to a reduction in her sentence. Condemning their joint conduct, he told the defendants they were 'both as bad as each other' and described them as 'manipulative and deliberate in taking advantage' of the victims.