Support NeoGAF

[Jeff Albertson]

Stuart Halls sentence was increased from 15 months too 3 years. On top of that the police are investigating further allegations against him which if proven will see him receive further jail sentences.

Plus the reason it was so low was that was the law when he committed the crimes not when it came to court

 

[F#A#Oo]

Why do so many people in this thread and similar threads on GAF think it's perfectly fine that public prisons are a free-for-all? Where if you commited a terrible crime and actually got a sentence set by a court, you are also expected to suffer additionally on account of the other inmates? I'd get it if the responses were simply stating the fact that it will inevitably happen, but I see so many "I hope he gets beat to death" and "Good, he won't last long" and similar. Really sad to see.

And don't even start to suggest that I'm defending him. He received a sentence by a court of law, isn't that enough?



Pretty much this. The "eye for an eye-mentality" is really disgusting.

We humans are violent and volatile by nature.

Just because the law has passed on a form of so called justice doesn't mean that it's a satisfactory conclusion.

When it comes to these sorts of happenings like rape, child abuse etc it hits a nerve that brings out our vengeful side...justice and revenge get blurred.

 

[Vermillion]

This seems like an incredibly slipperly slope. Who decides if "it's not possible"? What will be the criteria?

Psychiatric review board of sorts. Criteria to be determined by psychiatrists/psychologists.

 

[CyclopsRock]

We humans are violent and volatile by nature.

Just because the law has passed on a form of so called justice doesn't mean that it's a satisfactory conclusion.

When it comes to these sorts of happenings like rape, child abuse etc it hits a nerve that brings out our vengeful side...justice and revenge get blurred.

Obviously that happens, but it shouldn't be the intent. That shouldn't be what we aspire to, nor should we be happy to let it continue like that.

 

[iJudged]

Good.

.

 

[Jokab]

Psychiatric review board of sorts. Criteria to be determined by psychiatrists/psychologists.

The problem is that no psychiatrist, however many boards they have to hide behind, wants to be the one or among the ones who decide on what criteria a person should live or not. It's equivalent to "is he of any use to us? hm, no. let's kill him". No one wants that responsibility on their hands.

 

[Seanspeed]

You think the opposition is flawed, but the only arguments you present for your case is that you "don't see anything wrong with it". A bit weak if you ask me.

I have more to say about it, but do you have any defense for anything I said?

You can never be 100% sure of a conviction. There are only probabilities. Pictures can be faked, video can be faked, documents can be faked, conversations can be edited, investigations can be flawed and biased. That's before you even get to human error. At best you can be 99.99% sure you've made the right decision. Capital punishment excludes the possibility of a retrial if that 1 in a 1000 conviction turns out to be flawed. To be honest the time he spends in prison will likely be far more painful than a humane death.

So if there's video evidence and somebody admits their guilt, that's still not sure enough for you?

You can definitely be 100% sure in certain cases.

 

[CharmingCharlie]

In extreme cases, ones where there is absolutely no doubt about guilt whatsoever, I don't see the problem with capital punishment. I certainly don't think this case here is one that would warrant that, but in general, I don't get why people are so against it.

There have been plenty of examples of "extreme" cases where there was no doubt about the guilty party only for new evidence to appear later on exonerating the person that was 100% believed to be guilty of the horrific crime.

Capital Punishment is a perverse from of group revenge and has no place in a civilised society. Even the very slight chance that the state might accidentally execute an innocent man is too high a price to pay.

Ian Watkins and his two cohorts are now where they belong, behind bars and locked away for a very long time thus ensuring the safety of the public. Nothing would be gained by executing them other than people going "Oorah take that, my lust for vengeance is now satisfied till the next time I read about some nasty shit bag in the Sun newspaper".

 

[Jokab]

We humans are violent and volatile by nature.

Just because the law has passed on a form of so called justice doesn't mean that it's a satisfactory conclusion.

When it comes to these sorts of happenings like rape, child abuse etc it hits a nerve that brings out our vengeful side...justice and revenge get blurred.

As said above, while that is the case for many people, I think it shouldn't be desirable or excused in any way. Hiding your (in my opinion) disgusting opinions behind that it is human nature to feel that way is not a good excuse. The great people of history and mankind could all control their emotions and feelings and not let them cloud their judgement, which is what an eye for an eye-mentality is all about.

 

[OriginalThinking]

I have more to say about it, but do you have any defense for anything I said?


So if there's video evidence and somebody admits their guilt, that's still not sure enough for you?

You can definitely be 100% sure in certain cases.

Video evidence can be forged. Judges and juries can be bribed. I'm not suggesting that's what happened here, as it's extremely, extremely improbable - But that's my point. Probabilities determine convictions. Even cast iron convictions, even admission of guilt are never 100% certainties.

 

[moggio]

So if there's video evidence and somebody admits their guilt, that's still not sure enough for you?

You can definitely be 100% sure in certain cases.

Nothing is enough to justify capital punishment, no.

Also it can never be reinstated in the UK so it's moot anyway.

 

[Timedog]

Thread is full of people with violence and rape fantasies. It's kind of creepy to read.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Why keep him alive? He admitted the (disgusting) crimes. There's no doubt about the fact that it's him that commited these horrible acts.

I understand that the death sentence gets some hate because innocent people might get executed - and because of other reasons.

But in this case: why not hang him high?

The real question is why the government hasn't researched resurrection technology so we can triple execute these people and then ship them to the Chinese moon and space nuke them and then piss on moon ashes and then time travel back and super abort them by ending their whole bloodline 800 years ago and broadcast it all on TV and let lottery winners and victim's family flip the switches.

Unless we're willing to do this as a society we're weak and unless we all support this as individuals we're practically rapists ourselves.

If anyone ever did something to someone I loved I'd rocket launcher them and then break all their bones and then I'd uppercut them into a spike pit and feed them to genetically engineered super dire wolves. And my only regret is that I couldn't do it twice.

I'm a tough guy though.

 

[Vermillion]

The problem is that no psychiatrist, however many boards they have to hide behind, wants to be the one or among the ones who decide on what criteria a person should live or not. It's equivalent to "is he of any use to us? hm, no. let's kill him". No one wants that responsibility on their hands.

I disagree with that. Depending on how it works out, they may feel bad in hindsight, but I imagine that there are people who would draw up some criterion.

I feel that leaving remorseless people to die during an extended stay in prison on the chance that they'll regret their actions is crazy. Life in prison is more nonsensical, as it's basically "so it doesn't matter if you're rehabilitated or not, you're gonna stay here" and then those people tend to stop giving a fuck. Counterproductive on multiple levels.

But... so long as we're getting useful research done, they can be valuable.

 

[kurtrussell]

The UK glorifies criminals with TV`s and PS3's. There is a child killer who is already asking for parole. The UK's justice system is a joke.

Agreed. They should give him a Vita instead. That'd fuck him up.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Why keep him alive? He admitted the (disgusting) crimes. There's no doubt about the fact that it's him that commited these horrible acts.

I understand that the death sentence gets some hate because innocent people might get executed - and because of other reasons.

But in this case: why not hang him high?

Because he's the animal...not us.

 

[Vermillion]

The real question is why the government hasn't researched resurrection technology so we can triple execute these people and then ship them to the Chinese moon and space nuke them and then piss on moon ashes and then time travel back and super abort them by ending their whole bloodline 800 years ago and broadcast it all on TV and let lottery winners and victim's family flip the switches.

Unless we're willing to do this as a society we're weak and unless we all support this as individuals we're practically rapists ourselves.

If anyone ever did something to someone I loved I'd rocket launcher them and then break all their bones and then I'd uppercut them into a spike pit and feed them to genetically engineered super dire wolves. And my only regret is that I couldn't do it twice.

I'm a tough guy though.

Hmm... resurrection technology. Hmm... if we left them for some time, it'd be sort of like suspended animation. We're talking supervillain punishments here. Freeze them and send them to the Phantom Zone. If that were possible, it would be an interesting method of punishment... On the other hand it's possible that people would desire to be displaced in time... and it would kind of ruin the "improve our knowledge of these criminals" thing...

Spoiler

Thinking way too hard about a joke.

 

[Baconbitz]

I hope they put him on the last train to hell.

 

[Carnby]

Thread is full of people with violence and rape fantasies. It's kind of creepy to read.

A lot of posters have gone off the deep end. I don't know how this thread has stayed open.

 

[CountAntonius]

Thread is full of people with violence and rape fantasies. It's kind of creepy to read.

People are angry and venting because of a disgusting crime. I don't see it as anything more.

 

[Seanspeed]

Video evidence can be forged

Even when on top of that, the person admits guilt? C'mon now.

 

[UrbanRats]

I'm always appalled from and against "prison justice", i find it wrong on so many levels, even in extreme cases like this one.
I also support the idea of rehabilitation over punishment.

However it's not hard to at least understand the sentiment going on in the thread, given the fact that this guy not only committed one of the most terrible crimes there are, but also seem to be sarcastically uncaring about the whole thing, without a hint of remorse.

 

[EYEL1NER]

The real question is why the government hasn't researched resurrection technology so we can triple execute these people and then ship them to the Chinese moon and space nuke them and then piss on moon ashes and then time travel back and super abort them by ending their whole bloodline 800 years ago and broadcast it all on TV and let lottery winners and victim's family flip the switches.

Unless we're willing to do this as a society we're weak and unless we all support this as individuals we're practically rapists ourselves.

If anyone ever did something to someone I loved I'd rocket launcher them and then break all their bones and then I'd uppercut them into a spike pit and feed them to genetically engineered super dire wolves. And my only regret is that I couldn't do it twice.

I'm a tough guy though.

Oh shit, this post absolutely killed me.

And my only regret is that I couldn't do it twice.

lol

 

[beast786]

I don't know what you're saying here. That is not what eye for an eye means. What I'm saying is, the fact that he raped someone and people suggesting that it's great that he will get raped himself, is digusting.

Unless he is raped at young age like his victims, then only then its eye for an eye.

 

[Dram]

If you're a fan of Lostprophets, will you still be able to listen to their music after this?

 

[UrbanRats]

If you're a fan of Lostprophets, will you still be able to listen to their music after this?

I never listened to their music, but i keep watching Polanski movies and Herzog's movies with Kinski, though it is distracting, at least for me.

 

[Symphonia]

Link

It's a good job he's rotting slowly away in prison. I'd hate to give him the satisfaction of a quick death as I stab him repeatedly in the face, the stupid prick.

 

[EYEL1NER]

If you're a fan of Lostprophets, will you still be able to listen to their music after this?

I only liked a song or two at most of theirs a decade ago and am not currently a fan, but if I liked more of their music I wouldn't see it influencing me too much.

Carlos Coy, AKA South Park Mexican, is currently serving a 45 year sentence for sexually assaulting a nine year old girl. After the first charge, a couple more from other girls popped up. I still listen to his music.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Dude deserves worse.

 

[jufonuk]

Real talk: He's not going to make it out of prison.

I for one won't shed a tear if he doesn't ,

 

[d'artagnan]

As history goes in the late 50`s people would use big clock towers to hang people in the UK. The UK glorifies criminals with TV`s and PS3's. There is a child killer who is already asking for parole. The UK's justice system is a joke.

Bull and shit. Prisoners who are at the maximum privilege level may be allowed to have a PS2 in their cell but only with, typically, two games which are not allowed to be 18 rated plus it all has to be paid for out of their own money. I'm not aware of a single jail in the UK which allows PS3s. As for TVs, most prisoners are allowed one in their cell but they have to pay a set amount each week for the privilege of having a TV.

Some medium secure psychiatric units, such as the one I was detained in, do allow PS3s but most don't.

As for your child killer supposedly seeking parole, I presume you're speaking about Mark Bridger? He's not seeking parole, he's appealing against the length of his sentence and trying to get it changed from a whole life tariff to a fixed tariff - even if he wins his appeal against his sentence it would still be no guarantee he'll get out. When sentenced to life, the tariff is the amount of time you must serve before you are eligible to apply for release on licence. There's no guarantee you will be released once you've served your tariff.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Why is that disturbing? Declaring someone to be a "massive baby raper" based on their appearance alone is a pretty terrible thing to do to them.

I mean I find it helps me if a story this depraved has a perpertrator that looks like a fucking sicko.

He looks like the most regular guy. also his mugshot photo is markedly different to the rest of his fotos, looks like he's aged really quickly.

 

[freenudemacusers]

People are angry and venting because of a disgusting crime. I don't see it as anything more.

yeah, but saying 'enjoy getting raped/beaten/killed in prison' is just freepassing other heinous criminals to indulge in their perversions.

I mean I find it helps me if a story this depraved has a perpertrator that looks like a fucking sicko.

He looks like the most regular guy. also his mugshot photo is markedly different to the rest of his fotos, looks like he's aged really quickly.

This will probably be eye-opening for most people. very nsfw (language), but it shows how these types of predators continuously and consciously act in a manner to negate suspicion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sEqWlJbEX4

it's two parts, the second of which is pretty disturbing/upsetting.

 

[Kinitari]

jackiechanmymindisfulloffuck.jpg

If you plead guilty to a crime, you get to avoid trial and sentencing. Know the law.

 

[Timedog]

The real question is why the government hasn't researched resurrection technology so we can triple execute these people and then ship them to the Chinese moon and space nuke them and then piss on moon ashes and then time travel back and super abort them by ending their whole bloodline 800 years ago and broadcast it all on TV and let lottery winners and victim's family flip the switches.

Unless we're willing to do this as a society we're weak and unless we all support this as individuals we're practically rapists ourselves.

If anyone ever did something to someone I loved I'd rocket launcher them and then break all their bones and then I'd uppercut them into a spike pit and feed them to genetically engineered super dire wolves. And my only regret is that I couldn't do it twice.

I'm a tough guy though.

OMG

 

[alr1ght]

Sentencing remarks. You probably don't want to read them.
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-watkins-and-others.pdf

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Case No: 62CA1726112
The Law Courts, Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3PG Date: 18 December 2013
Before: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ROYCE
Between:
THE QUEEN
- v -
IAN WATKINS
AND B
AND P
SENTENCING REMARKS
.............................

**************
Mr Justice Royce :
1.
Those who have appeared in these Courts at the Bar or on the Bench over many years see and hear a large number of horrific cases. This case however breaks new ground.
2.
Any decent person looking at and listening to the material here will experience shock; revulsion; anger and incredulity. What you three did plumbed new depths of depravity.
3.
You Watkins achieved fame and success as the lead singer of the Lostprophets. You had many fawning fans. That gave you power. You knew you could use that power to induce young female fans to help satisfy your apparently insatiable lust and to take part in the sexual abuse of their young children. Away from the highlights of your public performances lay a dark and sinister side.
4.
What is the background ?
Count 18 dates back to March 2007. You met TT after a Lostprophets concert when she was a 16 year old virgin. The prospect of taking her virginity excited you. You got her to dress in a schoolgirl’s outfit and you videoed her and you having oral, vaginal and anal sex. You asked her whether she enjoyed being your underage slut. At the end you urinated over her face and told her to drink it.
That gives some insight into your attitude to young females at that time over 5 years before the counts relating to B and P.
Count 19 dates back to August 2008. The girl KJ was another fan aged 16.You videoed her having oral sex with you. She is to be seen snorting white powder

Page 2
**************
which you told her was cocaine. The taking of drugs linked with your sexual activities is a recurring theme.
Count 31 relates to about 90 indecent photos of children. They include 45 at level 4 and 2 at level 5. The age range of the children is from 2 to 14 years.
Count 32 involves images and videos of extreme pornography. There are 22 images of bestiality including oral and vaginal sex with dogs.
Watkins and B
5.
You B were only 19 when you met Watkins in late 2011. The communications between the two of you in March and April 2012 are seriously disturbing. That you were manipulated by Watkins may be obvious. But you were a mother. Your infant was only 10 months old. A mother naturally loves, protects, shields, nurtures and cherishes. Your infant would have trusted you implicitly. You totally betrayed that trust. What did you do? You had detailed discussions with Watkins about the sexual acts to which the two of you were going to subject your infant.
6.
You told the police you met up with Watkins at the Copthorne Hotel in Cardiff. On 21st March Watkins says “Come down this weekend and we can fuck him up again “You text back saying “tell me if you want to get your dick in our boy”. You had previously referred to getting your boy high on ice i.e. methyl amphetamine.
7.
This is what led up to the session at the K West Hotel in London on the night of 2nd/3rd April recorded on the video. What did you do? You presented your baby to him so that he could try to rape him. First in the mouth. Then in the anus. Watkins can be seen spitting on the boy’s bottom to facilitate his attempt. You can be heard and seen encouraging him. Could there be a greater betrayal?

Page 3
**************
8.
And then what did you do? You took your little boy’s penis in your mouth and gave him oral sex. You then took the boy’s hand and put it on your own vagina. Watkins then masturbated the boy. The planning and graphic detail are bad enough. The videoing of what you were both doing is an aggravating factor. The enjoyment both of you can be seen to derive from what you were doing is both sickening and incomprehensible.
9.
What happened after this? On 24th May you send Watkins a message saying “the boy is ready to be abused”.
10.
On 2nd August his message is “to be honest though, I think we have gone easy on him so far. Time to teach him and MAKE him learn to love it”. The evidence indicates you met at The Maldron Hotel in Cardiff. Then on 9th September you sent Watkins a photo of you licking your son’s penis. Counts 4 to 7 relate to this. In all it is a dreadful catalogue of abuse of a previously innocent boy to satisfy your own interests and lusts.
11.
Watkins and P
You P were a little older than B. You are now 24.Your communications with Watkins start in August 2012. It is not long before the communications turn to child sex abuse. There was talk of moving in together.
Watkins said “if u belong to me so does ur baby”
You responded “understandable… a mother - daughter slave duo worshipping you”.
Watkins said “that’s all she will know... a life of filth”

Page 4
**************
P said “the good thing about babies is put anything near their mouths and they start sucking it”. She went on to talk about both her and her baby sharing Watkins’ penis with their tongues.
The subsequent communications planning even more depraved activities for this little girl including forcing her to engage in sex with animals and how to take drugs defy belief. This P was your own flesh and blood you were talking about.
Watkins you referred to the girl as “my little fucktoy” and that sums up how you regarded her. Not as a human being but simply as a sexual object there for your pleasure.
You Watkins then said you could not wait to get mother and daughter taking crack cocaine.
You spoke of whoring her out to fat old men who would pay thousands. You went on “she needs to know mummy and daddy don’t love her she is just there to make us cum”. You spoke of torturing her for fun.
12.
Count 11 to 13 relate to the taking of photos by P of the little girl’s genitalia and sending them to you Watkins.
Count 14 relates to you P penetrating your daughter’s vagina with your finger and sending a photo of that and similar images to Watkins. Your response Watkins was to say you could not wait to stretch her.
13.
The lengthy split screen skype session on 12th September is again very disturbing viewing and listening. You Watkins encourage P to spit on her finger and penetrate her daughter. You P do just that with apparent enjoyment. Watkins is masturbating throughout. That is count 8.

Page 5
**************
14.
You have both pleaded guilty to conspiring to rape the little girl and to conspiring sexually to assault her. The evidence is compelling that you P took your infant to meet up with Watkins at the Travel Lodge in Caerphilly on the
2nd
October and/or at the Radisson in Cardiff on the 23rd October. What happened there is not recorded. You for a long time lied saying you had never met up with him. You now say you did but you left your baby with someone else. The evidence to me is compelling that you took your baby but I do not deal with you on that basis as I bear in mind you have been charged with conspiracy rather than the completed offences.
Let there be no mistake however. This plea means you accept that the two of you agreed that the little girl should be raped by Watkins and you both intended that that should take place. You Watkins initiated and orchestrated the appalling abuse but you P betrayed your daughter for your own selfish ends.
15.
Discount for plea
You B are entitled to the standard one third discount as you entered your pleas at the first reasonable opportunity. Watkins and P waited until just before the jury was sworn in on the second day. It is arguable that the case was so overwhelming that you should receive no credit. But I give you the conventional 10%.
16.
Dangerousness
First Watkins. The PSR. You spoke to the author of your desire to shock and your craving to push sexual boundaries. This craving was fuelled by your use of cocaine and methamphetamine which increased your sexual aggression. You spoke of not knowing to what extremes you would have gone but for your arrest. It is difficult to imagine anything much worse. The author concludes “Mr Watkins presents a high risk of causing serious sexual, physical, emotional and psychological harm to children, both male and female, and to women, specifically his female sexual partners.”

Page 6
**************
The author also says “it is also my assessment that the child victims in this case appear to be coincidental to his need to dominate and to test out the extent to which his sexual partners would collude and participate in his sexual interests.” Psychiatric report. Miss O’Neill told me on the last occasion they had a psychiatric report but it needed updating in the light of the changes in plea. There has been put before me a short report from Dr Huckle prepared after visits to Watkins in September and October. It refers to a report by a psychologist S. Van Scoyoc. It does not deal with the issue of dangerousness and Miss O’Neill specifically does not ask for any adjournment to obtain further such evidence.
17.
I bear in mind a number of factors : ( 1) the facts of these offences against these babies are enormously serious ( 2 ) the offending dates back to 2007; ( 3 ) the delight that Watkins evidently has when engaging in the most terrible offences involving tiny children; ( 4 ) his need to dominate any sexual partner and his corruptive influence over young females; ( 5 ) the using of drugs in combination with sexual assaults;( 6) the interest in extreme pornography; ( 7 ) the almost complete lack of remorse; in this last respect the evidence of the phone conversations after the guilty pleas on the last occasion is enlightening. There is one further matter of concern. One of the passwords you chose, which needed the assistance of GCHQ to break was I FUK KIDZ.
I have no hesitation in concluding that there is a significant risk to the public, in particular to young females and children, of serious harm occasioned by the commission by you of further specified offences. That risk is high.
18.
B.
There is a psychiatric report from Dr McFarlane dated 13/ 12/13.
There is reference in that report to your infatuation with Watkins and to his
strong influence in your drug taking with him. The future risk of you
reoffending in similar fashion is assessed as medium. It is not considered that
you were suffering from a mental illness at the material time.
The PSR.

Page 7
**************
The author’s assessment is that you pose a high risk of causing serious harm. The specific risk would be failure to protect children from others and sexual abuse by you. It is said however that you appear genuinely devastated for the harm you have caused your child and how his future will be affected.
19.
P.
I have read the report from clinical psychologist Dr Krljes dated 1st December 2013. That was prepared at a time when you were still protesting your innocence of these offences. There is an addendum dated 17th December. The psychologist concluded that you had a mixed personality disorder. She also considered it likely you used your daughter as a tool to secure Watkins’s acceptance of you. She considered that in the long term you would benefit from an opportunity to engage in psychological interventions targeting your personality disorder and sexual offending. The risk of you reoffending in similar manner is assessed as relatively low. The PSR. The assessment given is that you pose a medium risk of harm to children based on your current behaviour and the fact that you no longer have access to your own child who was most at risk.
20.
Mitigation
Watkins you are aged 36 and have no previous convictions. Your mitigation is your late plea. I also take into account that through your offences over the last 6 years you have lost a valued position with your group. I also take note of the letters written on your behalf from those who know a different side of you.
B You are aged 21. You have one previous conviction for an offence of fraud for which you received a suspended sentence. Apart from that you are of good character. Your principal mitigation is the fact that you pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity. There appears to be genuine remorse.

Page 8
**************
P You are aged 25 now and are of previous good character. You have the mitigation of a late plea. There are signs of remorse.
21.
You B and you P will hopefully mature and on your eventual release will steer clear of the corrupting influence of the likes of your Watkins.
I consider that in your case B and your case P I can treat you as falling just short of the threshold necessary for dangerousness – and determinate sentences are appropriate. With Watkins that is not the case.
22.
The Sentencing Guidelines
Factors indicating greater culpability are:
The planning (and its graphic detail)
The deliberate targeting of a vulnerable victim
The commission of the offences by two people acting together
The abuse of trust in the cases of B and P
The abuse of power in the case of Watkins
The commission of offences whilst under the influence of drugs
Factors indicating greater harm are: The fact that a baby is particularly vulnerable In the case of Watkins more than one victim Repeated assaults on the same victim Additional degradation through taking photos or videos as part of the offending
What is the position in relation to any harm suffered by these babies? While it is right to say there is no evidence of any residual physical harm it is not possible to say what psychological harm may have been suffered or may be suffered in the future. As is pointed out in paragraph 2.10 of the PSR for B “Given his very young age it is unclear what effect the abuse would have had on him. However this child is likely to have lifelong psychological difficulties coming to terms with the enormity of what has happened to him. Despite him

Page 9
**************
being placed in long term foster care…he will eventually learn the truth of his childhood and the abuse he was subjected to. The effects of which are significant and we cannot and should not underestimate the effect this will have on him for the rest of his life.” The statement from those who are now responsible for his care is very telling in this context. One obvious immediate consequence is that they will be deprived of the love and care of their natural mother. There is however disturbing evidence in respect of your daughter P. When her hair was analysed it showed she had been exposed to methamphetamine. It is said on behalf of P that she was only exposed to methamphetamine when in company with Watkins but it is urged that P might have gone back to her baby and somehow exposed her to it. It is not an issue which requires determination.
23.
For rape of a child under 13 where there is abuse of trust or more than one offender acting together the suggested range is 11 to 17 years with a starting point of 13 years.
The same applies to assault by penetration of a child under 13. The Guideline recognises that starting points and ranges are not rigid and that the circumstances of a particular case may justify going outside the Guideline. This is a case where in my judgment such departure would be justified. That is because of the horrific nature of the offences involving these babies and the other factors in respect of culpability and harm to which I have referred. The suggested range for sexual assault of a child under 13 is 1 to 4 years with a starting point of 2 years. The range and starting point for taking indecent photographs and distributing them varies according to the level and volume.
24.
Sentences
The Watkins/B counts Counts 1 and 2. I bear in mind these were attempts and not the full offences although the video shows how close to the full offences these attempts were. There was though more than one offence. They were followed by further assaulting in count 3.

Page 10
**************
I take a starting point of 17 years after trial. In your case Watkins that reduces
to 15.3 years.
In your case B it reduces to 11 years and 4 months.
On count 3 my starting point is 4 years which reduces in your case Watkins to
3.6 years which I round down to 3 years 6 months and in your case P it
reduces to 2 years 8 months. Those will run concurrently.
Count 4 happened much later in September. It was a wholly separate incident
of licking your son’s penis and taking photos of it. My starting point is 4
years. With discount for plea the sentence is 2 years and 8 months. There will
be concurrent sentences of 18 months after discount on each of counts 5 and 6.
But those sentences will run consecutively to the previous sentences on B.
Total sentence therefore in her case is 14 years.
On count 7 Watkins in your case you did not produce the photo although it
was taken for your benefit. The sentence will be 12 months concurrent.
25.
The Watkins/ P counts
Counts 8 and 9.
You P enthusiastically penetrated your daughter with your finger at Watkins’
behest. The lengthy and distressing Skype episode has already been described.
Count 9 is the agreement that she should be raped.
My starting point for each of you is 16 years before discount for plea. That
reduces it to 14.4 years which I round down to 14 years 4 months on each
count concurrent. On count 10 there will be a concurrent sentence of 3 years
after discount. On counts 11 and 12 P your sentence after discount is 2 years
concurrent.
Count 14 is a separate incident of you P holding open your daughter’s genitals.
You took a photo of that and sent it to Watkins. The starting point after trial on
count 14 is 4 years reducing to 3 years 6 months on plea. There will be
concurrent sentences of 12 months on counts 15 and 16. As I propose to make
these sentences consecutive to your other sentences I have to consider totality.
Having done so I reduce the sentence on count 14 to 2 years 8 months. The
total sentence for you P is 17 years.

Page 11
**************
26.
In your case Watkins I have to consider the remaining counts in totality. On counts 13, 17, 18, 19, 30 and 31 there will be concurrent sentences of 12 months. I am satisfied that you are a deeply corrupting influence; you are highly manipulative; you are a sexual predator; you are dangerous. The public and in particular young females and children need protection from you. On one view this is a case which would justify a “denunciatory” indeterminate sentence as in Saunders [2013] EWCA 1027. I bear in mind that such a sentence is one of last resort. The alternative is a very long extended sentence. In my judgment justice and protection of the public can and should be achieved by such a very long sentence.
The sentences on your offences with B must be consecutive to the sentences on your offences with P. But I have to bear in mind totality.
I therefore adjust sentences in this way.
The sentences on counts 1 and 2 will be 15 years.
The sentences on counts 8 and 9 will be 14 years consecutive. Custodial term 29 years.
There will be an extended period of licence under section 226A of 6 years on those counts.
All other sentences will be concurrent. Your total sentence is therefore one of 35 years.
In your case that means you will have to serve 2/3 of the custodial term before you can be considered for release by the Parole Board. If you are released you will remain on licence for the extended period.

Page 12
**************
In your case B and P the usual rule will apply. You will be eligible for release after serving half your sentence. You will then be on licence. The detailed provisions will be explained to you by your counsel.
Other orders.
Forfeiture of exhibits.

 

[freenudemacusers]

^^ holy christ. send the mother to mars.

edit: oh there is an actual video of this. hopefully that kid can find a good foster home or someplace with distant-ass relatives.

 

[ComputerMKII]

Sentencing remarks. You probably don't want to read them.
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-watkins-and-others.pdf

Jesus

 

[El'Kharn]

Insane to suggest that an appropriate response to a disgusting crime is for the state to murder the criminal, and for people to get some entertainment out of it by it being public. Don't get the blood lust for child molesters at all.

Seriously? ffs

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Sentencing remarks. You probably don't want to read them.
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-watkins-and-others.pdf

Yeah, this guy deserves whatever torture is coming to him in prison.

 

[Symphonia]

I actually threw up in my mouth a little. All three of them deserve to be shot.

 

[Nicktendo86]

I cannot fathom how anyone could not read those notes and want those three people be seriously hurt or killed in prison.

 

[Carbonox]

I just read. Holy. Fucking. Shit.

They cannot ever be fucking released from prison. Ever. It's sickening.

 

[Real Hero]

er i started reading that and actually threw up a little in the back of my mouth

 

[freenudemacusers]

I just realized that there were two different women in this. how does that happen once, let alone twice.

 

[CountAntonius]

I am all for everyone involved to simply not exist anymore, however how the hell are they at the very least not spending the rest of their lives in prison?

 

[PAULINK]

*Sigh* I used to like their music too.

 

[Forsythia]

Reading those remarks makes me want to vomit. Absolutely disgusting. I'm glad this asshole will be locked up.

 

[Timedog]

How is he saying he's not guilty and not a pedophile???

 

[Batigol]

He'll be killed in prison or put on his own and be under 24 hour suicide watch

Hopefully the first