Regarding Comments From 'Letsby'

Thank you for your input, it is very much appreciated.

Your comments have been read and digested, and thread additions and modifications are being made, where relevant.

The Issue

R -v- Roy Whiting

High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division) judgment

Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWHC 1329 (QB)
Case No: MTR/900/2004 9 June 2010

Before: The Hon Mr Justice Simon
 ------------------
Between: Regina and Roy William Whiting

Full judgment: R v Roy Whiting (PDF 52kb)

*****

Comment:

We draw your attention to sections 2 and 3.
 
Obiter dicta, suppositions and accusations are not binding. The sentencing outcomes are clear, and reproduced, here, for easy reference:
 
*****

"The Hon Mr Justice Simon:  

Introduction 

1. This an application by Roy William Whiting (‘the Applicant’) for the setting of a
minimum term for his Life Sentence, pursuant to Schedule 22 Paragraph 3 of the
Criminal Justice Act 2003.

A Summary of the background to the application

2. On 12 December 2001 a Jury at Lewes Crown Court returned verdicts of guilty on
two counts of an indictment which charged the Applicant with the kidnap and murder
of Sarah Payne. On the same date he was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder,
with no separate penalty for the offence of kidnap. He was 41 years old at the time. 

3. On 18 December the Trial Judge (Mr Justice Curtis) recommended that the Applicant
should be detained for the rest of his life and should never be released. In his written
report he focussed on 2 particular matters which aggravated the offence: the previous
conviction for kidnap and assault, and the efforts to destroy the evidence of his
crimes."

[2010] EWHC 1329 (QB)

*****

Comment:

If you have any evidence of sexual assault (for that is all it can be, at best), it would, of course, be of great interest to us.

*****

Thank you, once again, for your input, to the work of The OSC - it is always welcome.

Postscript

*****

Comment:

As loath as we are to use this publication, as a source, it is, nonetheless, illuminating:

*****

"The jury of nine men and three women had earlier been told by pathologist Dr Vesna Djurovic that there was no way of telling whether Sarah had been sexually assaulted before she was killed on July 1 last year.

When her body was found 16 days later in a shallow grave in a field off the A29 at Pulborough, West Sussex, it was badly decomposed and had been disturbed by animals.

But Dr Djurovic said Sarah's death was likely to have been a "sexually motivated homicide."

Sex stain on Whiting shirt 
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/143460/Sex-stain-on-Whiting-shirt.html?print=yes 

Parents in tears over Sarah evidence
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1667211.stm

Evidence too painful to hear
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Sarah+Payne+Trial%3A+The+~pathologist+gave+details+~ about+Sarah%27s...-a080218971  

Psychiatrist who told a judge that Whiting was no paedophile

"This is the psychiatrist who concluded Roy Whiting was not a paedophile. Dr Tony Farrington compiled a report when the pervert admitted kidnapping and indecently assaulting a nine-yearold girl in 1995.

Despite harrowing evidence, Dr Farrington told Lewes Crown Court the accused did not have a treatable mental disorder and did not have paedophile tendencies."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-89674/Psychiatrist-told-judge-Whiting-paedophile.html

How Roy Whiting was freed to kill

"A PSYCHIATRIST told a Crown Court judge that Roy Whiting was not a paedophile before he was sentenced for abducting and sexually assaulting a nine-year-old girl five years before he seized and murdered Sarah Payne.

But Philip Marshall, Whiting's barrister, had urged Judge Gower, QC, to sentence him on the basis that he was not a paedophile and "not as a defendant who necessarily is going to pose a risk to society thereafter"."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1365163/How-Roy-Whiting-was-freed-to-kill.html
 
How the media hounded a psychiatrist

"Reporters gleefully descended on the phrase “did not have paedophile tendencies,” attributed to Dr Farrington. 

In fact the psychiatrist had never said this; instead it was an interpretation put on the report by the then defence barrister, Philip Marshall, which ended up in the court transcripts. Instead Dr Farrington had indicated in his report that Whiting did not meet the official diagnostic criteria for paedophilia.

He had made this statement specifically to assist the court in making a decision over whether a hospital order could be considered. It was not made with the general public or the press in mind, as they don't have access to court reports unless they have been read out in entirety in court."

http://ukpmc.ac.uk/articles/PMC1121969//reload=0;jsessionid=GtEaeCMXrejSJJAd6RZY.0

‘It’s a charter for sex fiends’

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3007685/Roy-Whitings-sentence-has-been-reduced-by-ten-years.html#ixzz245yWBGMH