FURY OVER FIVE YEARS JAIL FOR BABY RAPIST

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

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."

Very scary. A judge can do anything he wants to do and is not required to explain his decisions. Increasingly, judges at all levels disregard both state and federal constitutions. We have 6 justices sitting on our Supreme Court who believe the United States of America should be subject to the laws of foreign countries, not the Constitution. Our legislators have the power to remove these renegade judges but they are just as corrupt.

where do the court ordered evaluators fit into the "loop"?
they must be picked by someone and most of them seem just as evil as the judges are.
i dont suppose we could be fortunate enough that judges have a "retirement age"? how long can one be on the bench?
i think its frightening that they do not have to justify thier rulings or are accountable to anyone. they can also rule on somthing and you only have 14 days to respond, they can essentially guarantee which "judge" in an appeal youll get, insuring the ruling stays the same.

The mere fact that he's a shrink almost guarantees he's on the left. These professional BSers pull in fat fees to "evaluate" animals like Taylor, usually giving a rosy evaluation so that he can be placed in "therapy" that results in earlier parole and generates yet more fees for shrinks. The more crime he commits, the more money is available for more "consulations," so naturally "diversion" is favored over incarceration.

5 years? Words escape me. Especially after seeing this story this morning, also from the UK.

Life for thug who raped a man

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.

...total waste of fuel....coat the perp. w/honey....total waste of honey...stake-out over fire ant hill on a warm cloudy day.

45 posted on 09/06/2003 2:02:03 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid,doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. :)

It makes you wonder what was going through the Judge's mind when he handed down this conviction. What is the purpose of a legal system if degenerate scumbags like this are allowed back in society?

There is no respect for that poor child in this judges courtroom.

You gotta also wonder, why is this judge sympathetic to this pervert??? He should be jailed right along with his little love interest.

46 posted on 09/06/2003 5:12:37 PM PDT by Stew Padasso (pro-rock.com - bsnn.net - libertyteeth.com - BFD - Puff Puff Ping)

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."

Oh, really. Well, if he was my son I'd take him out into the back yard and shoot him. That's my idea of leniency for him.

What was the 2nd incident?

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.

Sick SOB, isn't he? Yeah, he's cured, all right. He'll never do it again. < /sarcasm >

I thought your post should draw more attention:

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.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.