Evil-unveiled.com/Lux

Warning: This article contains especially disturbing subject matter. Reader discretion is advised.

Lux
Physical Description:
Age:	41
Birthdate:	July 7, 1983
Occupation:	Currently: Incarcerated. Completed a degree course in computer science before his arrest.
Location:	Bilston, UK
Affiliations:
Individuals:	Sorrow
Pedophile Websites:	GlWiki, tkGL, Somersault's Forums, Visions of Alice, Butterfly Kisses
Synopsis:
Lux is currently incarcerated after being charged with possession of child pornography and sexual assault of a minor boy under 13 years old. He is the creator of the online pedophile group tkGL and was at one point very close friends with another pedophile, Sorrow, whose 4 year old twin sisters he lusted over.

Darren Cresswell AKA "LuxofTKGL" from his sig pic on GirlChat

Lux AKA Darren Cresswell is a British pedophile who is currently in jail. In 2005, police raided his apartment and took his computer. They found almost 1,100 pictures of child pornography. During this time, he also had an online relationship with a girl who was in the care of the government. He started to believe that she was a journalist or an undercover agent and since he was not allowed on the computer while awaiting trial, they no longer speak; however, he has speculated getting back in touch with her once he can use the computer again.

Also, during the year that Lux was awaiting trial, he had multiple contacts with children. A fellow pedophile, Sorrow, allowed Lux to visit him and also went to see Lux at his home. Each time, both pedophiles spent time with Sorrow's four year old twin sisters. Sorrow was later arrested as well for his involvement with pedophile websites and indecent images on his computer.

He was later charged with 16 counts of making indecent images, 1 count of exchanging indecent images through his website, tkGL, and 4 counts of touching a minor and rape. A little boy who he was taking care of had reported to the police that Lux had touched him and made him perform oral sex on Lux. In November of 2006, he plead guilty to making indecent images and sexual assault. The rape charge was dropped through his plea. It is not known exactly when he was finally brought into custody to serve his sentence, but he is now serving time. He also has ordered to register as a sex offender for life and can not work with children.

Lux is dangerous because he does not feel what he did was in any way wrong. He made excuses for every picture he had on his computer, and claims that he does not understand the "lies" the little boy said about him. He only plead guilty because he thought he would not have to be in jail. He even plans to return to his pedophile website once he is allowed to use the computer again. He wrote up a "how-to" guide for pedophiles who want to avoid the law and still perform illegal activities.

Quotes

I was woken up on the thursday, about 7.50ish by the more affectionate of the two sisters, who proceeded to climb into my bed (yes I was clothed - and so was she) beside me for a quick cuddle - and well I was not going to complain - talk about dreams coming true? We held each other and she lay back on my pillow, as I gently rubbed her little tummy with my hand (yes her tummy, lol dont get any ideas - my hand stayed well within the safe zones!), and I remember seeing such a happy, contended look on her face, smiling - knowing that she was happy to be close to me, and that she was relaxed, comfortable and enjoying my company - well i cannot say I had ever felt as good as I did at that moment. I adored her, I was adoring her - and she was loving it... you cannot beat that.

Sorrow and his sisters visited, and stayed at my house for a couple of days. We took them bowling/cinema (to see Lassie), the zoo, etc. The most amazing days of my life, and I developed quite a emotive relationship with one of the two twins, she was a very affectionate little girl, loved her hugs and her kisses (well more pecks - if you think of how 4yo girls usually kiss). I adored every inch of her, and I know she loved to be around me - she would smile when we she would see me at the train station and shout my name as if its Santa arriving on christmas morning - run to me and I would pick her up and we would hug and kiss. Absolutely amazing... anyway.

They also visited a few days before the 23rd of December - again a fantastic time, but at the end the girls REALLY didn't want to go - and I didnt want them to go. The way my previous police visits had gone - I was almost expecting to be put into a jail cell for Christmas, and banned from ever seeing them again - although I had not done anything inappropriate or sexual to/with them (yes, there were thoughts... but nothing more than that - Sorrow would have killed me had it been lol).

Our Investigation

These are the steps we took to verify that "lux" is Darren Cresswell:

Lux is the creator of the pedophile website GlWiki.
On this website, he posted several entries under his username Lux about his arrest and trial: questions, timeline of arrest/trial, and the reason for his arrest.
Lux is also the creator of the currently down pedophile website tkGL.
Searching the domain information on his website, we found the name Darren Cresswell.
Doing a search of this name, we came across an online survivor forum here discussing the bust of a man named Darren Cresswell in Bilston, UK for possession of child pornography and sexual assault on a young boy.
To verify the story, we searched through UK newspapers in the area of Bilston and found the actual news article.
This news story matches information that lux posted in his "timeline" post from above.

Online Accounts

Known Screen Names

LuxOfTKGL
C0
Spook
Mono

Known E-mail Addresses

Known Websites

http://www.tkgl.net/ - currently down, but it says it will return
http://www.thoselittleangels.info - sister site to tkGL
http://childlover.org/index.php/User:Lux
http://friends.portalofevil.com/fshow.php?userid=9474&si=3
http://www.childlover.org/index.php/User:Lux/Cl_meet_2 - his story of having a group of pedophiles meet, hang out, and stare at little children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/LuxOfTKGL - His contributions to Wikipedia articles on pedophilia, showing pedophilia in a positive light and defending it

Affiliations

Pedophile Websites

Individuals

Sorrow

Last Known Address

Bradley Lane
Bilston, UK

Additional Quotes

Information on avoiding criminal charges to other pedophiles:

Before my "run in with the law", I felt that in the UK, images of children that were illegal were: Photographs/Videos of Erotic Poses, Photographs/Videos of Sexual Activity I was unsure about Lolicon and Cartoon CP, but was sure about Sexual Stories. Now... this is the way I believe it to be:

An indecent image of a child is far more broad than a simple defintion can give. The best way to describe it is, if the image were of an adult - as opposed to a child, would the image be classed as indecent. Now of course this means that there are Indecent Images of Adults - however such images are Not Illegal. From my experience - an indecent image of a child need not be nude for it to be indecent. Clothed images that are focused on vagina/buttocks/chest (latter in relevant cases - such as nipslips too). Sexual poses (spread legs, or various sexual positions). Non-sexual elements that reflect a sexual act (eating banana with a 'knowing look' etc). Upskirt images, and images that are not really showing the object "decently". All of the above can be classed as Level 1 Indecent Images. Therefore, can be illegal.

Also, given the law in the UK - Viewing an image and deleting it is not a valid defence if the image was linked to or contained on a page "likely" to contain indecent images - this means, pages that are about the topic of pedophilia, child sexuality or related to those topics. Under UK law you can be charged with Making such an image.

Now, as for the "harder" "worser" levels of Indecent Images. There is a scale, which is meant to be the following: Level 2 - Solo Child Sexual Activity, or Child/Child sexual activity. Level 3 - Child/Adult sexual activity but nonpenetrative/ forced Level 4 - Child/Adult penetrative/forced activity Level 5 - Sadism/beastiality involving children. However, the above gets thrown into disarray when you realise that the perception of the photo is ultimately the deciding factor. An image that contains no sexual activity, but a nude body of a child, with red pen made to imitate blood drawn on her body - which would otherwise be given a level 1 rating - is Level 5, due to the PERCEPTION of the image as Making the child bleed. Also, images that have animals in - even if the animals are not involved in the sexual act, can have their level increased to 5.

Penetrative activity need not be vaginal/anal/oral or indeed it does not have to be penetration of the child. A man for example, with his mouth over a boys penis in a photo - would be enough to class the act as Penetrative, and therefore have it attributed Level 4 status. It is not all doom and gloom however : Lolicon, cartoon and non-realistic imagery (ie as long as it doesn't look like it was a photograph of a real child) are totally legal - regardless of content. Of course, if you get caught with thousands of hard-core lolicon pictures on your pc - your defence that you are not a pedophile might not hold up - LOL!

Also, sexual stories are totally legal to possess and read. HOWEVER - They will be read, and if they are even remotely related to anything in your own life - expect charges to be made, people and children to be interviewed and many many unpleasant things done before you are given the "sorry we made a mistake" - if you get lucky. In short, don't write fantasy stories that contain ANYONE you know in real life, or that are based on any real life times you shared.

Child Sexual Abuse

Before this all went mad - I originally thought that in the UK, to commit sexual abuse (I was not aware it is classed as sexual assault) - you had to touch a child's genitalia for a sexual purpose. However, I can say this is not the case. The way the law is worded - the touching merely needs to be "sexual", but does not require any sexual activity to be performed - compound this further with the way in which the touching is classed as "sexual" - A touch is classed as sexual if the motivation behind the action is believed to have some sexual basis. So lets assume you have a little girl in your arms, and she is naked. If you pick her upside down because you want to see her pussy - You have just sexually assault her. You touched her (by picking her up), and because you did so to see her pussy - the touching was "sexual". So... to clarify - DONT do anything for a sexual purpose - it is against the law. Also, say that you did when you didn't in any stories or elaborations on any real moments - they will pick up on it.

Talking Online

If you had asked me about this, before June 30th 2005, I would have said "its fine, just dont do anything illegal and you will be fine"... but BOY was I wrong. Basically, if you are talking to a girl/boy online who is under 16, they, their parents, their friends, infact anyone who knows them can if they feel like doing it - report you to the police as a suspicious person - and the police can (and usually DO) end up raiding your house, and taking your computer away. Now assuming you are sensible, and avoid clicking links that you are unsure of - and therefore not having any indecent images on your PC, and that you are very careful about what child model sites you visit - if any. It will hopefully blow over in a few months, or a year (depending on their speed) - but still, you will have to endure all that nightmare of a time, and most likely will be put seriously out of pocket for it too.

Common sense would dictate that it is a bit paranoid to say it is impossible to talk to all girls under 16 online - but be careful. Ideally only talk with ones you know in real life - and make sure you get to know their family/friends at least, an elder or carer of theirs - so that you are not seen as a suspicious person. It goes without saying, don't arrange to have sexual encounters with them - don't, don't, DON'T lol.

Security and Common Sense

Finally, a bit of common sense I should have followed: Dont keep chat logs, and make sure you wipe your PC regularly. Chat logs can and will be used by police forces to unearth anything they can - regardless of how minute a detail. They went through over 3,000 of mine, and used a couple of lines of 3 out of the 3,000 or so against me. There is no purpose to keeping them - they are insecure and will only end up doing you harm. And make sure you wipe your PC - deleting items is not good enough. If you do not want the item there - wipe your free space/file space slack/swapfile and so forth. There are plenty of programs out there to do such - This is good security anyway, for example if you are selling your PC to someone else, so that they cannot retrieve personal files/information.

As for Common Sense - make sure you keep yourself in the loop on any legal changes, no matter how minute in this regard - the best way to do so is rest the details about all of the legal cases where child pornography or child sexual abuse is written about. Any rulings or decisions, or such.

His beliefs:

I would like to see child-orientated pedophiles, openly allowed to be around children, without having to keep the issue of their sexuality a secret. I would like to see the public, come to accept that such peoples are not dangerous, and that having them around children, or even trusting them with the care of a child, is not a risk.

Therefore, their "choice" is non-existent when it comes to adult/child sexual activity. Now this does not have to be harmful - infact the person can decide "heh, it felt good i guess, and the guy really did care for me and love me" - but you cannot argue that they were not exploited by the adult into doing something that they did not have the right knowledge of to make a proper choice about..

Apparently, Lux did not find out until later why he was initially raided by the police:

At the time I didn't know why - I had the horrible thought my online girlfriend had reported me, that she was an undercover cop, or journalist or something. I didn't find out until March 2006 why I was raided. It was because of a letter I had sent to Social Services. The letter I had sent them, was intended to explain to them the situation between me and my online girlfriend, explain to them that she was in one of their care homes, and to ask them if they could arrange a supervised visit for me to visit her, so that we could get to know each other in real life - in a way that is safe for her, and secure so that everyone could be assured that nothing untoward was going on. Naive of me? VERY! But I was blinded by love... always the hopeless romantic. Anyway, from this they considered me a risk to her, and so raided me... nothing more, nothing less..

Regarding his incarceration:

How am I coping? Well, I doubt I would be coping as well if it wasn't for my belief in GOD, and Jesus Christ my Saviour. I would not be coping well at all. Right now, I am just thinking about getting through one day at a time, finding things to look forward to - even if they are quite boring things, and just drudging through this madness with the hope that someday I will see Sorrow's sisters again, that perhaps I can get to know my old girlfriend again, and love her and help her again - that someday I will be cuddling and hugging with little girls again, sharing love with them, and love for them. That someday I will be back online helping with the GL community, running tkGL again. That I will be able to get a job, pay off my debts, and get all of my items back that the police have essentially stolen from me.

About how he wishes he was molested as a child:

I had no sexual act performed on me, nor did I perform any sexual act as a child - the exception to this being masturbating myself, which I learnt myself from an early age. There was no abuse whatsoever in my childhood at least - to any effect on me. I wish I had some of those fun encounters as a child would have made nice memories - still it never happened. As far as liking children sexually, and such, that is part of what I was born with. As far as being around children and enjoying their company, and loving them, that is something I believe is partly genetic, but partly grown into.

Regarding his plea:

That is why, on the 6th November 2006, I plead guilty to the "Making indecent images" charges - as I stated above - I had no defence for, and also plead guilty to a Single count of "Sexual assault" - in that Touching of the boy and the touching being sexual. They dropped the "Showing CP using tkGL" charge, and dropped the Rape charge (how kind of them!).

Related Media

[1] - news article about his arrest.
[2] - jailed for 3 1/2 years in 2006. He has most likely been released.

A SUNDAY school teacher has been jailed for three-and-a-half years after sexually assaulting a small boy and downloading 1,000 pornographic photographs of children.

Judge Nicholas Webb told 23-year-old Darren Cresswell that his paedophilia had become a "consuming interest" which he clearly enjoyed.

Cresswell took a degree course in computer science at Wolverhampton University and set up his own website for paedophiles to discuss their fantasies with children and how they were struggling to deal with the problem, said John Hodg-kinson prosecuting.

He was a regular member of the congregation at the New Testament Church of God, taught at Sunday school and also took children on trips,

Cresswell was arrested after information picked up by the Metropolitan Police in London about his website, Wolverhampton Crown Court was told.

It was traced to his home, in Bradley Lane, Bilston, and police raided the property and seized his computer, which contained more than 1,000 indecent images of children.

Cresswell was arrested and accepted he was responsible for the website, but denied he had set it up for his own sexual gratification.

"He told the officers the site had helped him to overcome his own feelings towards children because he had been able to talk about it with others," said Mr Hodgkinson.

Cresswell admitted sexual assault on a young boy and 16 charges of making indecent images of children. He was also ordered to register as a sex offender for life and barred from ever working with children.

Oliver Woolhouse, defending, said Cresswell felt sexual attraction towards young children.

The website was a "forum for debate to discuss with others struggling to deal with the same issues" and that was why he had downloaded the images.

He added that Cresswell had not joined the church to be close to children.

"He has been going to the church since he was 12 and his father went before him," said Mr Woolhouse.

The judge told Cresswell he was a self-confessed paedophile paedophile or US pedophile who appeared to wear his badge with "defiance and pride".