Dungannon man '˜groomed children to commit online sex acts with their siblings'

Michael Dynes also encouraged other women and girls to pose erotically on webcams for bogus modelling agency auditions, prosecutors claimed.

He is further accused of making secret “up-skirt” recordings of females, and viewing indecent images of children, extreme porn and even a so-called snuff movie where the victim was raped and then shot.

Details emerged as 39-year-old Dynes, of Rossin View, was refused bail.

Although he is currently charged with 16 offences as part of a major investigation by the National Crime Agency (NCA), a judge was told the scale of the case is expected to increase significantly.

Dynes faces accusations of possessing and making indecent images, voyeurism, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, and carrying out a sex act in the presence of a child.

The allegations cover a six-year period between 2009 and 2015.

NCA officers have examined three laptops, an external hard-drive and a USB stick.

Prosecution counsel Philip Henry said the inquiry started with a focus on banned material of all categories.

“They included videos and still images, extreme pornographic material referred to as bestiality and also what was described as a snuff movie where the female in question, who was raped, was shot,” he told the court.

Stressing the scale of the case, Mr Henry contended: “We are talking about hundreds of child victims.”

The court heard Dynes is further accused of setting up a camera to film women in a private setting.

Mr Henry continued: “There were a number of videos and images... where females at his workplace, on holiday or at an airport have been secretly recorded by him trying to set a camera so he can see up their skirts.”

A judge was told Dynes has accepted some of those offences and identified four victims to police.

A defence lawyer argued Dynes has been in custody since last October and is unlikely to go on trial until next year. Refusing the bail application, Mr Justice Colton said: “The delay is not sufficient to amount to a significant change of circumstances.”