Baby Rape Sentence "Unduly Lenient" - UK news, to our shame

[Pert_UK]

"Scotland's most senior legal officer has asked for a report into whether a five-year prison sentence given to a man who raped an 13-month-old baby was "unduly lenient".

Lord Advocate Colin Boyd QC's move follows anger at the sentence given to father-of-three James Taylor, who took pictures of himself raping the baby. Children's charities said they had expected Taylor to be jailed for life...

Taylor, a construction industry welder, was told by judge Lord Reed he would have been jailed for much longer, if it had not been for a psychologist's report assessing there was only a low risk of him reoffending...

Lord Reed said..."I have a report from one of Scotland's leading forensic psychologists, who formed the view that your viewing of pornography compromised your moral boundaries." "

Full article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3078216.stm

Right.......so this perfectly moral guy decided to view and make an extensive collection of online child porn (which in itself creates demand for the abuse and photographing of children being abused).

However, the poor bloke so so affected by looking at this porn that it warped his sense of morality and made him think it was OK to film himself raping a 13 month old baby.

Surely this man is as much a victim as the child? Shouldn't we just put him on probation and help him get over the trauma of being forced to abuse children?

:eyes:

In case you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic. This crime sickens me, and a 5 year sentence (out in 3 with good behaviour) sickens me almost as much - he'd have got more jail time for embezzling money.

Still, given that his picture is all over the news websites, I don't suppose he'll last long in jail.........but that's not the point.

I hope that the legal profession sees sense and that his sentence is indeed increased to life - there are some first offences which don't merit leniency.

[KCDem]

1. this is absolutely disgusting.

I can't imagine WHY or HOW anyone would ever sexually touch a child, especially one under the age of, say, 5. These sickos don't deserve ANY leniency, as they surely have no moral compass at all.

[Pert_UK]

10. Slightly puzzled by your use of a specific age...........

Care to explain why you specified the age of 5? It just seems very odd to me. I mean, at least if you'd said puberty then they'd be a reasonably biological basis for your comment, but 5 just puzzles me immensely.

P.

[saigon68]

16. SEND HIM TO A MASSACHUSETTS PRISON

The State uses prisoners there to "right" Justice </sarcasm>

[roguevalley]

2. he's a pedophile and they can't be cured.

frankly, I am ASTOUNDED at the bogosity of the legal profession
some times when they do stuff like this. That baby isn't even
being considered. "He won't re-offend." He will.

I remember a judge in AMerica letting a rapist go because his
victim -a five year old girl- was so 'provocative', ie, so sexy
she invited her rape. I could still kill someone over that.

Dipshittery in the legal profession is not exclusive to Scotland.
(I adore Scotland)

RV

[roguevalley]

3. the fact that he took pictures and probably would have

them on the internet shows his lack of empathy and complete
unreliability in rehab, etc.

Lordy.

[Pert_UK]

11. Excellent use of new words there.....

"Bogosity" and "dipshittery" have both been noted and added to my personal brain custom dictionary!

I agree entirely with your comments - the judge who made those comments is arguably as bad as the paedophile himself. Anyone who can see something deliberately sexual in the behaviour of a 5 year old has created it themself in their mind in order to justify behaviour, IMHO.

I would like that judge jailed and put on a sex-offender's program until he works out exactly what was wrong with his comments.

P.

[NekoChris]

4. 13 -MONTHS-?!

AGLGLGLGLGLGLGLGLLGLGDS)_$*@_#$*^@)(#$&^WSUDHBV@*($#Y@

*head explode*

He is TOTALLY going to get it when he gets to prison tho.

Remember, the people in there rate that sort of crime at the BOTTOM of the barrel.

The judge might have taken that into consideration, that he'd be lucky to last a year without being strung up.

..13 MONTHS?!..

[BeHereNow]

9. He won't last two months in prison...

the fact that he was given such a short sentence for such an
atrocious offence will only encourage his attack by fellow inmates...
I give the guy two months...tops.
BHN

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. Wonder if Scotland has laws like here

where convicted sex offenders can't live in a neighborhood unless the neighborhood has been informed-and then in some cases, the neighborhood can object. I predict that this person will have a very very difficult time living anywhere-even in prison, people who do this are looked down as the lowest of the low.

[bleedingheart]

6. Those laws ...known sometimes as Megan's Law

are an unfunded mandate... so it all depends on the resources of your local county as to whether or not they will keep the database and the neighbors updated.

For example, I know of a fellow who was arrested and served time for molesting some young boys... when my mother told me that he was back in town I went to the database and searched our county to see if he was "registered"...much to my suprise they had NO one registered.

I checked the neighboring county and they didn't have anyone at all.. I live in a very populated area...and as much as I would like to say there are no sex offenders in our area...I think there probably are...

so I asked the assistant district attorney about this and he told me that the reason I saw nothing was because the local police stations do not have anyone regularly check into this ... or keep the database up to date.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. England and Wales don't, and think Scotland's the same

There has been a campaign to get a similar law enacted (pushed particularly by some tabloid newspapers), but it hasn't been done, possibly because a large proportion of the British public can't be trusted with such information.

One of the tabloids blackmailed some people who did have access to the lists (the Scouts, I think) into giving them some names and addresses of convicted paedophiles (they said they'd denounce the Scouts as being pro-paedophile if they didn't), and then published some. Mobs then gathered on the streets, breaking windows, daubing the houses with paint, threatening to kill them, etc. I remember a TV news shot of a couple of grown women phoning up someone, shouting abuse at them, and collapsing into giggles. It was clearly the best fun they'd had all year.
People who shared a name with the paedophiles were targeted. So was a paediatrician, because the mob was too dumb to know the difference.
After that, the tabloids backed off a bit - they hadn't realised just how stupid some of their readers were.

Having said all that, this story does make me ashamed of the British justice system (so far - at least the sentence can be increased on appeal).
Consider:

• He raped the 13-month old
  
• He was also convicted of indecency toward a six-year old girl
  
• He had 2280 indecent images of children
  
• He blames his crimes on 'the stress of working nightshifts'
  
• He is 43, and held a normal job - ie he is not educationally sub-normal
  
• He is 'stricken with remorse'
  

Somehow, this has been translated to 'low risk of offending again' (he's already a multiple offender - where was the remorse after the first offence?), and 'viewing of pornography compromised his moral boundaries' - if anyone were that suggestible (and I don't believe anyone with an IQ above 50 would be), then they need to be kept away from any influence whatsoever, for good - if they can't learn to be a moral being by 43, they never will.

The judge and psychologist need sacking, and the rapist should have a life sentence. I think we're all preaching to the choir, but sometimes it's good to express your disgust, isn't it?

[sistersofmercy]

7. I am very sickened by this story. What an absolute injustice to the

universe.

[Zhade]

8. He's a dead man.

He won't last five weeks, let alone five years.

If there were a way to execute him, then revive him and kill him again, a thousand times over, that wouldn't even begin to cover the punishment this monster deserves.

I suspect his life force will be quickly dissolved by the universe once his body is cold.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

12. Algebra

x - (-y) = x + y

To get rid of a debt is to gain wealth.

To have a positron run into your pool of electrons is to end up with one electron less.

To kill this bastard is to CREATE LIFE. Creating life is no small feat.

[colorado_ufo]

13. At 13 months old:

1) The child had to have been seriously injured physically;
2) It is highly likely, since the child had stayed at his home, that he was a person in a position of trust;
3) The possession of thousands of images infers a pattern that will not be broken;
4) He is known to have crossed the line of decency more than once and rapidly progressed from naked images of children to baby rape;
5) He may have easily done much more than he was caught at;
6) He has completely humiliated his family;
7) He was part of an Internet ring of child pornography, which means international involvement;
8) There are probably many more considerations, but I am now too nauseated to contemplate them.

Bottom line is, why - why - why didn't the court take the above into account? The sentence itself was a crime.

[flamingyouth]

14. What a horrible story

I just cannot imagine why this sick predator got only 5 years. Good grief...

[Spentastic]

17. Watching porn makes you rape babies?

I'm having trouble not letting the right winger in me have this guy buried alive.

This guy should serve a long time inside. He should be confronted with the true horror of what he has done. He should be kept away from kids (including his own) for the rest of his natural life.

Finally reoffending is the least of the Judges worries what about PUNISHING the guy for raping a baby?

[dudeness]

18. warning: explicit post

i could only imagine this character was caught in the act of depraved sex with an infant..those amongst us whom are parents would not leave our babies with strangers, so i will assume he was caught red handed..as well obviously a baby cannot give evidence...if this is the case and there is absolutely no doubt this act of barbarity has taken place..the only option is the death penalty for this piece of filth..

[chenGOD]

19. Did you read the post?

He took pictures of himself raping the baby....

[discordian]

20. cut him up on a meat slicer, start at the feet

2mm slices should work well. Make sure to feed him plenty of coagulants so that he doesn't bleed out very quickly.