Paedophile OAP from Upminster freed by judges on appeal
A pensioner jailed for child sex offences he committed nearly 50 years ago was freed this week by top judges on appeal.
John Winn, 74, of St Mary’s Lane, Upminster, was handed a two-year jail term in May, after admitting three counts of indecent assault against a child.
But, after his lawyers challenged his sentence at London’s Criminal Appeal Court on Tuesday, it was reduced to a suspended sentence by senior judges.
The court heard Winn committed the offences in the early 1960s, when he was aged just 26, but they were not reported until almost half a century later.
His lawyers argued his jail term was “too long”, saying he should have been sentenced as he would have been if his crimes had come to light at the time they were committed.
You may also want to watch:
They also said the crown court judge didn’t take enough account of his personal circumstances, including the fact he has prostate cancer and is the main carer for his wife, who suffers from significant mental illness.
Lord Justice Moore-Bick, sitting with Mr Justice Mackay and Judge John Bevan QC, said the jail term was “excessive” and reduced it to a 12-month suspended sentence, with supervision by the probation service.
- 1 Illegal car meet in Rainham sees 49 fined for Covid breaches
- 2 Letters: Social distancing, vaccination experience and how to stop catalytic converter thefts
- 3 Infection rates are now falling in Havering - is lockdown working?
- 4 Havering parks and gardens five feet under water as rivers burst their banks
- 5 70% of Havering residents voted to leave the EU
- 6 'It was surreal': Hornchurch personal trainer wins £10k with family on TV gameshow
- 7 Fines issued to Romford and Upminster restaurants flouting coronavirus restrictions
- 8 Brentwood Tudor church damaged in illegal New Year's Eve party raises nearly £20,000 for repairs
- 9 More than 100 Covid dead at Queen's and King George this week
- 10 Heritage: Measuring speed of sound at Upminster
The appeal judge added: “Given the weight of the mitigation and in the extraordinary circumstances of this case, the court could properly avoid passing an immediate custodial sentence.”