A CONVICTED paedophile set up an illegal 'sex shop' selling unclassified adult porn from his then home in Nelson, a court heard.
Clint Eastwood, 44, had gone into business selling restricted DVDs at £4 a time - even though he was claiming unemployment benefits - and was caught after Lancashire Trading Standards Service, in a test purchase, placed an order for two of the 'disgusting' titles he stocked.
Officers raided his then property on Barkerhouse Road, last March 28, and found almost 800 discs.
The video recordings had no classification certificates or should only have been sold in a licensed sex shop. But, even after he was caught, and the DVDs seized, the defendant carried on his law-breaking business, making cash for another month.
Burnley Crown Court was told how Eastwood, who has a record for making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children, is on the sex offenders register for life.
He is also subject to a 10-year sexual offences prevention order, but had not breached it by the latest offences.
He had, however, flouted a 48 week jail term, suspended for two years, imposed in December 2011, after he had admitted failing to comply with a previous SOPO when he stayed in the same house as a nine year- old -girl.
Eastwood on Tuesday admitted possessing video recordings of unclassified works for the purpose of supply and possession of video recordings for the purpose of supply other than from a licensed sex shop, last March 28, and two counts of supplying a video recording of an unclassified work, last April 15 and 30. He was given six months in prison, suspended for two years and was ordered to pay an £80 victim surcharge.
The hearing had been told how officials discovered 792 discs in total at Eastwood's then home but he was still selling unclassified DVDs in April.
Judge Beverley Lunt said: "This man shouldn't be anywhere near sex tapes, not with his history. It's worrying."
She added: "Plainly, he was in receipt of income while claiming benefits. If I fine him, the taxpayer pays his fine. I don't think that's right. I'm not having the taxpayer paying his fine. That's not right. It's not punitive to him."