Independent UK court-case reporting Publicly available sources · Not a government website
David Pincott, aged 42, from Pentre, Rhondda Cynon Taf — case image

SOUTH WALES POLICE · view source

Verified against listed sources Child sexual abuse materialChild sexual offencesGrooming & child-contact offences

David Pincott

Age 42 · Pentre, Rhondda Cynon Taf

Court outcomeFour years and eight months in prison

Case and court outcome

Court
Cardiff Crown Court
Plea
Changed pleas to guilty
Verdict
Changed pleas to guilty
Outcome date
July 9, 2026
Sentence type
Immediate custody

Verified case summary

Undercover investigation

David Pincott, 42, from Pentre, communicated on Snapchat with two accounts he believed belonged to girls under 16.

The accounts were operated by undercover South Wales Police officers working within the force's Online Investigations Team.

The messages formed part of an investigation into attempted and completed sexual communication with a child and an attempt to meet a girl following grooming.

Devices and charges

Officers attended Pincott's address and seized electronic devices, including mobile phones and laptops.

Searches found multiple indecent images of children and evidence that he had communicated with another girl under 16.

The charges included attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child, engaging in sexual communication with a child, attempting to meet a girl following grooming, three counts of making indecent images and possessing prohibited images of a child.

The device findings therefore added separate image offences and another child contact to the conduct detected by the undercover accounts.

Guilty pleas and sentence

At Cardiff Crown Court on 9 July 2026, Pincott changed his pleas to guilty.

The court sentenced him to four years and eight months in prison.

South Wales Police published the result on 16 July 2026.

The force's report identified the Online Investigations Team as the unit behind the undercover accounts and recorded that device analysis expanded the case beyond the conversations that first prompted the investigation.

The official report supports the date, court, guilty pleas, offence types and custodial term, but does not specify additional licence, notification or prevention-order details.

Those fields are therefore omitted rather than displayed as assumptions.