FURY OVER FIVE YEARS JAIL FOR BABY RAPIST

Mirror ^

[Stew Padasso]

FURY OVER FIVE YEARS JAIL FOR BABY RAPIST

Sep 5 2003

REPUGNANT: The pervert who raped a baby AND the judge who jailed him for a pathetic FIVE YEARS

By Maggie Barry, Richard Gray and Kirsty Storrar

A FIVE-year jail term for a paedophile who raped a baby girl triggered outrage last night.

Politicians and children's charities slammed the "incomprehensible" sentence given to James Taylor, 43, who photographed himself carrying out the assault on the 13-month-old. He could be out in as little as two years.

The maximum was life but judge Lord Reed said he was accepting a psychologist's assessment that Taylor, of Grangemouth, Stirlingshire, was full of remorse and unlikely to re-offend.

Scottish National Party justice spokeswoman Nicola Sturgeon said it was a "gut-wrenchingly appalling case". And Conservative Annabel Goldie called it "sickening, repugnant and beyond description".

Children's campaigners said Taylor should have been given life not just five years.

His sickening attack only came to light after he was caught up in a major police inquiry into internet child pornography.

In court, he admitted the rape of the 13-month-old girl, lewd and libidinous behaviour towards a six-year-old girl, and possessing indecent images of children.

A charge relating to a third youngster - taking indecent photographs of a an 11-year-old while she was in bed - was dropped before proceedings began.

Life was the maximum penalty available to judge Lord Reed when he passed sentence at the High Court in Dunfermline on Wednesday.

He said he was accepting a psychologist's assessment that Taylor, 43, was full of shame and remorse and was unlikely to re-offend.

Taylor, a welder and father-of-three who photographed himself carrying out the rape, could now be back on the streets in two years with remission for good behaviour.

Last night ChildLine spokeswoman Natasha Finlayson said: "He should have got life. Five years in prison is an absolute joke.

"There is no doubt that he will be a serious danger to children when he is released.

"And what does it say to the children who have suffered? They will live with the emotional scars for a lifetime, how will they feel to know that their suffering was only worth five years?

"The judge determined his sentence on the basis of a psychiatrist's report which said he would not do it again - that's laughable. We have reams and reams of evidence to support this."

Megan Bruns, of Kidscape, said: "Sex crimes against any children are a horrible and terrible thing.

"But on a child as young as 13 months, who trust and depend on adults totally, they are an abhorrent violation."

She said research had shown nearly 70 per cent of paedophiles have up to 10 victims, while 30 per cent re-offend up to 450 times.

Margaret McKay, chief executive of the charity Children 1st, said: "To inflict this suffering upon a child who depends on adults to keep her safe is hideous."

Nicola Sturgeon, of the Scottish National Party, said it was a "gut-wrenchingly appalling case".

She added: "I don't think anyone would have thought life would be inappropriate in this case, because it was such an appalling and sickening crime."

Ms Sturgeon, the SNP justice spokeswoman, is urging the Crown Office to appeal against the term.

Scotland's top legal officer has already asked for a report into whether the sentence was "unduly lenient". Police involved in the case were "disgusted".

Scots Tory justice spokeswoman and deputy leader Annabel Goldie said: "The circumstances of this crime are sickening, repugnant and beyond description.

"The public will find incomprehensible a sentence which in real terms amounts to approximately two years."

Lyn Costello, of Mothers against Murder and Aggression, said: "As a parent, I think he should be hung. The judge and the psychologist should be charged with aiding and abetting a crime, if he reoffends when he gets out."

Taylor,a first-time offender, from Grangemouth, Stirlingshire, was caught after police were tipped off that he had been posting child porn on an internet bulletin board.

A raid on his home uncovered CDs and floppy disks containing 2,280 indecent images of children.

Most had been downloaded from the net, but computer specialists recovered some horrific images of Taylor's own making which he had tried to delete.

Taylor, whose children are aged 15, 13 and 11, pleaded guilty on August 7 to offences committed between August 1998 and December last year.

He blamed the "stress" of constant nightshifts to provide for his family. At sentencing on Wednesday, defence advocate Mhairi Richards said he was stricken with remorse and had lost four stone in weight.

Lord Reed said forensic psychologist Gary MacPherson's report suggested Taylor's viewing of pornography had compromised his "moral boundaries".

If it had not been for Mr MacPherson's low-risk assessment, he would have been jailed for much longer.

Taylor's sentence was backdated until January 27, when he had been remanded in custody after an initial court appearance.

Last night his mother Dorothy, who lives in a farmhouse near Falkirk, said he was not capable of raping a baby. "It is not too lenient," she said, "you could hardly expect me to agree it was."

[Centurion2000]

Its times like these that vigilante justice is called for!

Acceptable justifiable homicide in Texas .... he needed killin'

[geaux]

I agree. His penalty may be reversed by the SCOTUS, but I doubt they'll get to his case before it's carried out in Angola.

[mtbopfuyn]

Sick. The article mentions the baby and then says there was a 3rd child aged 11. What was the 2nd incident? That's 3 times he's been caught which begs the question why the judge didn't inquire how many more children he's scarred. Let's hope his cellmate, Big Bubba, continues to make his night shift stressful.

[Skooz]

Heck, he might not last the night in the Bossier City jail.

[HamiltonJay]

NOW THIS JUDGE IS A TRUE CASE FOR RECALL! Get this bastard off the bench NOW!!! He is sicker than the bastard who raped the child!

[Jeff Head]

The perp needs killin'...plain and simple.

The Judge needs a seriou attitude adjustment and is unfit to rule on any bench, IMHO.

' What a sad, sick tale. It is what the liberals in this country want us to become...and in some places we are already there.

[bruin66]

Flame away, but if they're not going to keep this animal in prison forever, he needs to be dead.

If this were your typical American prison, I'd give him a week, at most. Hope the Scots are like minded.

[areeves79]

I agree this scum needs to die, but not by the electric chair. It just wastes too much energy. Do it like Iran, put him in a sack and throw him off a cliff and if he lives hang him.

End of Rant

[FlyVet]

Rape, murder = 5 years, as long as the child is young enough. Just a post-natal abortion:

5 years for mom of buried newborn 10:00 AM MST on Tuesday, August 19, 2003

By Joseph Barrios © 2003 ARIZONA DAILY STAR

A former UA student who pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the death of her newborn daughter was sentenced Monday to five years in prison.

Heather Porzel's time behind bars was decided as officials released new figures indicating that eight babies have found homes after their mothers said they wanted to participate in the county's Safe Baby program.

Porzel, 21, originally charged with first-degree murder, pleaded guilty in July. Her brother found the newborn baby buried in their back yard in March 2002. Investigators said Porzel hid her pregnancy from her family and gave birth in the bathroom of their East Side home.

According to court records, Porzel knew the baby was alive because she heard her gasp for breath and later cry. She dug a hole in the back yard, placed the child in the hole and buried her.

The infant was discovered about a week later after the family dog had been digging in the yard.

Porzel told investigators that she knew the baby could be put up for adoption or turned over to the Safe Baby program, where mothers can drop off healthy newborns at a hospital or fire station without fear of criminal charges.

Porzel's lawyer, Donald Klein, said she didn't know how to handle an unwanted pregnancy.

"She was scared She panicked. She thought she was alone, and clearly she wasn't," Klein said.

Deputy County Attorney Kathleen Mayer saw the circumstances differently.

"The state can think of nothing more cruel than burying alive a human being," she said.

Mayer wondered, "When will people stop making excuses for killing babies?" and said the baby's life was "snuffed out by the selfish and callous actions of the defendant."

Porzel simply said, before breaking down in tears, that she knew she had done wrong. Her mother, Lori Porzel, appointed as the victim's representative by legal default, said nothing during the sentencing.

Superior Court Judge Lina Rodriguez noted that nobody except Mayer spoke on behalf of the unnamed, infant girl.

"It's an awful case," Rodriguez said. "A lot of people would have given anything to have this child."

The judge said of Porzel, "I don't know if she was crying at the time like she is now. There is no one to speak for the child. This is a very sad case."

The body of the child remains at the Office of the Medical Examiner, more than a year and a half after it was discovered. Mayer said Porzel's family has given no indication they intend to bury the child. She said the baby can't even get a death certificate because she "has no identity."

If Porzel's family makes no claim to the baby's body within 90 days, Mayer's County Attorney's Office unit will personally arrange for a proper burial, Mayer said.

Ann Donohue, the local Safe Baby coordinator who works for Casa de los Niños, said she felt "very sorry and saddened" that Porzel had heard about the Safe Baby program but did not make use of it.

Officially, Child Protective Services has recorded only five cases across the state in which a mother turned over her child through programs like Safe Baby. But in the Tucson cases, "the babies were born in the hospital and the mother wanted to give it to the Safe Baby program," Donohue said. "The mother was worked with to give the child up for adoption. This is not the way we had envisioned the program working, but we think it's great."

Dan Benavidez, a Pima County Attorney's Office spokesman, said none of the eight mothers who turned their children over to the Safe Baby program or inquired about it has been criminally charged.

Officials are hesitant to release details about individual cases but say that, in most cases, mothers who gave birth to their children at local hospitals were encouraged to work out private adoptions to retain anonymity.

Officials were concerned about turning the children over to Child Protective Services as opposed to doing so through Safe Baby.

Donohue said the Safe Baby task force is working on an education campaign for University of Arizona students and hopes to start one for Pima Community College students.

For more Arizona news, visit www.azstarnet.com or www.azfamily.com.

[dljordan]

I think they're appointed by the Queen or something. They can't get recalled.

[attiladhun2]

The criminal justice system in Europe (and liberal U.S. jurisdictions) is just that--criminal.
A slimeball who rapes a baby ought to have his privates removed with a rusty butter knife and then burned alive.

[Skooz]

My fervent wish for this guy goes like this:

Hi, I'm your cellmate, Bubba. I'm doin' 20-25 for slowly torturing to death some idiot who attempted to touch a little girl the wrong way. Took him weeks to die. What you in fer?

[Bonaparte]

"...Just so long as he's sorry..."

He's not the least bit sorry, and the court is well aware of that. Remorse requires taking full responsibility, and he hasn't done that. Instead, he blames it all on "overwork."

The whole system over there is deep in denial about this. He's referred to in the article as a "first time offender," and yet the same article makes it clear that he has had multiple victims and has been deeply involved in the production and accumulation of child porn. His mother is a real piece of work. In spite of video evidence that he raped this infant, she denies categorically that he did it.

IOW, he's a career offender who finally got caught.

We saw this same sort of phenomenon back when Louise Woodward murdered little Mathew Eappen. All Britain closed ranks around her, Judge Zobel redirected the jury's verdict to let her off and Britain is now entrusting this convicted felon, this unreconstructed baby killer with a license to practice law.

[moondancer]

what id like to know is who "selects" these court ordered evaluators?? ive heard more horror storys about them and how sex abuse is just "boundry issues" right here in the good old USA.

[joesnuffy]

If you have an M.D. you can kill all you like...in an abortatorium
and not only get paid big bucks to do so...
You can be honored and considered part of societies "elite"
Thats the nature of "this present world"....and the nature of man...
A baby rapists needs to be put down...and needs a government that is moral enough to sponsor that idea

[jimt]

I agree withn the quote in the article that he should have been hung, but only after he was barbequed over a very slow fire.

[Bonaparte]

Not mentioned in this article is the fact that Taylor repeatedly raped this child from August of 1998 (when she was 13 months old) until December of 2002 (when she was 5 years old). That's four years of sexual assault. The girl was frequently left in his home by her mother, a family friend.

But far more evil than the perpetrator is the judge.

[moondancer]

err, she is getting "life" from what he did to her, why shouldnt he get life in prison, seems fair.
this judge really is evil. a friend of mine in chicago had simular circumstance with her kids, the judge KNEW there was abuse because she talked to the kids, even stated that in court, BUT went with the evaluators recomendations of more visitation anyways. this confuses me, why do the judges go with whatever a court ordered evaluator recomends, even if they dont agree or its ridiculous?? do the judges pick these, the state, attorneys??

[Bonaparte]

The judges themselves will usually answer that question by pointing out things like prison over-crowding, the lengthy and costly appeals of stiff sentences, the rehabilitability of the offenders. But all that is window dressing. The real reason these magistrates let child rapists off so easy is that they are committed to a leftist vision of America, which requires that the moral fabric of society be destroyed. I have to admit they're accomplishing their goal.

[moondancer]

it appears that way. scary....