By Latrishka Thomas
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) is seeking to get a harsher penalty for the 21-year-old man who was convicted of raping his five-year-old niece.
Last week, Justice Colin Williams gave the paedophile and incestophile a sentence of five years and three months for an offence which carries a maximum of life imprisonment, or 30 years in this case.
The man, who pleaded guilty to the charge of incest, is said to have raped the minor on at least two occasions on December 28 2019.
According to the little girl’s brother, on the night in question, he and his uncle were playing football in Ovals and returned home after 9pm.
The then 11-year-old boy was sent to purchase something, and when he returned he saw his then 18-year-old uncle in the bedroom where his sister and mother slept and observed him pulling up both his and the child’s pants.
The young boy noticed that his uncle’s penis was erect, and he questioned what had taken place, but the uncle just laughed.
The boy then went to sleep, but during the night he woke up to find his uncle raping the young child.
He even saw the accused cleaning the child before dressing her and himself.
The young boy immediately woke his mother and told her what he’d witnessed, who, when she checked her young daughter, found evidence of the cleaning.
The mother further cleaned the girl and sent both of her children back to sleep, while she messaged the complainant’s father to inform him about the incident.
The mother reported the matter to the police the next morning, and when questioned, the five-year-old told the police that her uncle always assaulted her in such a way.
She also stated that the accused had threatened to kill her mother if she told anyone about what he’d been doing to her.
The defendant was taken into custody, and when questioned by the police, he denied the allegations and said that he only used to masturbate over her and touch her with his penis.
When asked why he did this, he responded that he “was horny and wanted sex”.
In sentencing the convict, the judge said that he could not consider the man an adult since he was 18 at the time of the incident and was “not the sharpest tool in the shed”.
For that reason, he started with a possible sentence of 15 years and went down to five years and three months after making deductions for his guilty plea, remorse and previously good character.
Yesterday, the prosecution filed an appeal arguing that the sentence was too lenient and that the judge erred in the law and principle when he imposed it.