Prison officer, 26, 'had phone sex with inmate after he slipped her his number'
An ex-prison officer had “secret phone sex” with an inmate at a prison after the lag slipped her his phone number, a court heard.
Ruth Shmylo, 26, of Pontypridd, Mid Glamorgan, is accused of beginning an “inappropriate relationship” with the unnamed prisoner in her time as a prison officer at HMP Parc in Bridgend.
A trial at Cardiff Crown Court heard Shmylo and the inmate were in a relationship between December 1, 2020, and April 17, 2021. She began her role at the prison in October 2020 but did not pass her probationary period and was released in April 2021. The inmate was moved to HMP Manchester in May 2021, and conversations between him and Shmylo were recorded by the prison authorities. Shmylo was arrested on July 20, 2021, and made a number of admissions in her interview with police.
In his opening, prosecutor Matthew Cobbe said: “The prosecution case is that she, Ms Shmylo, did not make any real effort to prevent or bring to an end or stop that relationship with that inmate while in Parc. She on more than one occasion tried to bring their relationship to an end, however the very fact she tried to bring that relationship to an end is of course evidence she was in an inappropriate relationship with that inmate at the important time.”
The ex prison officer arriving at Cardiff Crown Court (PA)
The 26-year-old is accused of having secret phone sex with the prisoner (WALES NEWS SERVICE)Shmylo told officers he slid her a piece of paper with his number on, and said she “felt pressure” to call him and “felt trapped”, WalesOnline reported. She failed to report this to prison staff, and the fact the inmate was in possession of a mobile phone, which is prohibited in prison. During the calls the inmate asked the defendant to tell him she loved him, which she refused to do, and told her he “missed her face”.
Man in 30s dies after being stabbed in park sparking police probe
Mr Cobbe added: “She could and should have declined to receive the number, she could and should have reported the incident to staff at the prison, she could and should have reported the fact the inmate appeared to have a mobile phone, and she could and should have chosen not to call his number. Instead she chose to call the number.”
The court heard the defendant and the inmate were in contact “pretty much every day”, and on one occasion he threatened to harm another prisoner if she didn’t call him. As a result, she said she kept the other inmate in his cell for a whole day. She said the inmate asked her to meet his mother to “tell her what he was really like”, but when she initially refused he said his mother had “made an effort, including doing her nails”.
The court was told Shmylo and the inmate had engaged in “phone sex”. Mr Cobbe said: “She explained this was principally the inmate saying things to her, noting ‘I was listening for the best part of it'. Putting that slightly differently, that means she was actively engaging in phone sex with the inmate for some of it. She was asked about the frequency of calls with the inmate, and accepted the calls continued to the point of her arrest.
“We do not accept she was found to have taken the inmate’s call but had control to engage with him. She understood the risk of engaging with a prisoner and understood that staff could be compromised or find themselves manipulated if they engage in such a way with a prisoner. She repeatedly speaks of the pressure she felt. The basic facts we say demonstrates she had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with this inmate.
“Having received the telephone number from him, she’d call him on that number, used a SIM card for that purpose, failed to report he had a mobile phone, put another prisoner at risk by failing to report that, interfered with another inmate’s liberty, met with his mother, discussed her personal life with him, the prison, and engaged in phone sex with him.”
On her birthday, he contacted her saying “Happy Birthday Princess Girl”, to which she replied “Thank you”. She later messaged the inmate, telling him he was in the “friend zone”.
Mr Cobbe said it was “not possible” to define the nature of Shmylo and the inmate’s relationship, or to say whether their relationship was physical. He added: “It’s not possible to say where on the spectrum between friends and lovers was their relationship. But we say the prosecution do not need to fall into the trap of trying to do that or try and engage in that exercise. All that’s needed is for you to be sure she was in an inappropriate relationship.”
Shmylo denies one count of misconduct in a public office. The trial continues.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
