Man spared jail for child sex abuse because his sister died.

[flossyfloo]

The story is here...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-35328799

Saying just that his sister died is slightly misleading given that she was murdered. I see the defence claimed that he blamed himself for her death and this twisted her thinking.

This sentence is clearly outside the sentencing guidelines. Assuming the conviction is for rape of a child under 13 as per the report the minimum sentence is 6 years. Given the description in the article this may be a Category 2 offence for which the minimum sentence is 8 years. The mention of trust in the article makes me wonder if the offence involved abuse of trust. If so the minimum sentence would be even higher - 11 years.

Judges can step outside the sentencing guidelines in exceptional cases. Without having heard all the evidence it is impossible to be certain but it does not sound like the circumstances surrounding the murder of the accused's sister are anywhere near enough to allow the judge to step outside the guidelines, let alone this far. It may be, of course, that the news reports are missing some vital piece of information. If they are not I would hope that the prosecution appeals against this sentence.

I didn't mean to be misleading with the title but even though his sister was brutally murdered, I can't see how the sentence can be justified. Unless, as you say, the reporting isn't accurate.

I hope the sentence does get appealed.

If I understand it right it goes:-
Some bloke raped and murdered my sister... So I can rape someone elses sister.

Sorry but...
I rather think it should be , Having lost my sister to a rapist, I will protect someone elses sister.

I once met a rape victim. Her life had been destroyed by what that man did to her. She couldn't have a normal conversation with half the population. I would happily castrate the animal that did it to her...

Some bloke raped and murdered my sister... So I can rape someone elses sister

The defence argument was that the accused blamed himself for his sister's death and this twisted his thinking. My understanding was that they advanced this as mitigation, not justification.

As said elsewhere, if his sisters death affected his mental health so much that it causes him to rape 12 year old girls, he should be in broadmoor.

It'd be fine for it to affect his mh btw, no judgement there. I can understand why the rape and murder of his heavily pregnant sister could make him ill.

But if he's ill, he needs to be in a secure hospital.

That may be the argument.. but it feels a bit contrived. As Beyond says, if he is so unstable he needs to be under secure supervision.

A bit of a Hobsons choice. Plead mental instability and get locked up in Broadmoor. Plead guilty and go to gaol....

But I don't care about him. I care for his victim.