My letter to witness care
I have written up my feelings on the James Fowler case, and lack of an adequate sentence.
I am on my way to Witness Care as soon as I log off. The following text is what I am taking with me! There's plenty of it!
___________________________________________
Re:James Fowler case sentencing, Durham Crown Court, Friday 17/03/06.
Dear Sir / Madam I have several concerns over the recent sentencing of James Fowler, and believe that he has merely received a slap on the wrist for the offences of which he is convicted.
During the summing up process, incorrect information was repeatedly stated and subsequently published in The Northern Echo on Saturday 18/03/06.
Printed as follows:
Deborah Sherwin, in mitigation, said: Hes now and elderly gentleman answering for indiscretions which took place when he was aged between 20 and 30.
It would appear that since the 1970s he has not committed any offence of any sort.
1/ The definition of gentleman is: A man of the highest honour, courtesy, and morality. The judge or prosecution should have challenged this description of James Fowler. How does this definition fit a person who has been convicted of multiple acts of child abuse. How does this definition fit a person who, when presented with the initial charges, denied them all (17/10/04). He further denied the charges at numerous subsequent appearances in both Magistrates and Crown Courts. He denied further charges when a second survivor of his crimes came forward. The first time he pleaded guilty was 17th January 2004. This was only because he felt pressure, because the judge on that date was going to allow evidence from a third survivor to be heard. Earlier on that date he was trying to split the two initial cases, so that they would appear as one persons word against another, to a jury. When subsequently appearing for sentence, he requested that his guilty plea be withdrawn, causing further delays and duress. That definition does not apply to a person who lied to the CPS that I had been discussing him in the local community this was not true, as I was anonymous at that point (and still am mostly so) at this point the initial details of his crimes had already been printed in the local Town Crier Publication.
2/ Indiscretions definition: an ill judged act. How on earth is grooming and abusing children seen as in ill judged act. It was a case of multiple planned actions not something that occurred on the spur of the moment. Again this statement should have been challenged in court.
3/ When he was aged between 20 and 30. This was a mathematically incorrect statement:
James Fowler is now 69!
The crimes committed against myself were in 1969 37 years ago, when James Fowler would be 32 years old!
The crimes committed against the second survivor, were stated as being committed in 1977 29 years ago when James Fowler would be 40 years old.
4/ It would appear that since the 1970s he has not committed any offence of any sort.
I first spoke to the police in an official context on the morning of 17/10/04. They then went off to perform a recognition exercise. I was subsequently asked if I would collate an official statement urgently. I later found out (as stated in court) that when the police went to James Fowlers house on that day, young boys were leaving the premises, one had an air rifle that he had been given by James Fowler. During a search of James Fowlers house, further guns were found, that he admitted were for local children. Note there was no mention of any toys being found that were suitable for girls.
I believe that this confirms that he was still intending to groom young boys, and that had I not spoken to the police, the boys seen leaving his house could have been future victims of his activities. I believe that this point should have been argued successfully in court.
Did the Judge, Prosecution or Defence really believe that he was just giving boys guns to be nice to them? Thats what I believed at first when he was grooming me!
During the summing up and sentencing on Friday 17/03/06, I was rather emotional, so could not take in everything that was said. However I feel that due to the issues I have raised above, I need to request a copy of the Summative Transcript from the sentencing day. I understand that I have a right to request this from The Judge, Tony Lancaster
The above are my main concerns, but I also wish to challenge the sentence:
A/ When initially making his guilty plea, Fowler was told to expect a custodial sentence, i.e. He would be going to jail. He subsequently requested that his guilty plea be withdrawn (request was subsequently refused). That means that he added to the duress of myself, witnesses two and three (I have spoken to both of them, so that is a fact). This extended the trial by 2 additional court dates, incurring additional costs for both the crown and others involved in the case. This action alone should have ensured that the sentence was harsher than it would have been initially..
I t appeared in the summing up that he was given some credit for the guilty plea! Why? - he waited until the 17th of January 2006 to make that plea, but tried to withdraw it, meaning that he was trying to force a full trial and deny guilt! He had many opportunities to plead guilty, the first being 17/10/04. I had to keep these events fully in my mind from 17/10/04 to 17/03/06 that is 17 months longer than I should have needed to! Does anyone really care about the survivors of these crimes?
James Fowler has to my knowledge never once expressed regret for what he did, nor apologised!
B/ Judge Tony Lancaster told Fowler: If you were sentenced for such offences committed recently, in my view it would be prison, measured in years.
This comment indicated that a firmer sentencing option would be preferred!
Why, based on that comment was the sentence suspended is the crime any less because it is historical? The comments made in point 4 above, should have ensured a custodial sentence was applied!
It may be argued that a suspended custodial sentence, is still custodial, even though it is suspended. That is like arguing that an oven is hot, merely because it is an oven it does not become hot until someone switches the power on!
C/ This may be a point for MPs, The Attorney General, and The News of the World (Sarahs Law) why is it that the sentence applied is based upon what the sentence would have been in 1969 or 1977? I would appreciate it if someone could by me a house, car, weekly shopping and fuel at either 1969 or 1977 prices.
In summary, I would like a Copy of the Summative Transcript from the Trial. I also wish to appeal against the Insufficient Sentence that I believe was imposed.
I am a member of a support group for male survivors of child sex abuse. The group currently stands at over 3000 strong (two years ago it was only 1600). Each of these individuals have suffered abuse to varying degrees during childhood. The vast majority have not taken their abusers to court they are groomed to keep secrets, then when they feel it is too late to achieve some form of retribution they often give up trying. Many have not told anyone outside of the support group of the crimes that were committed against them.
How do I encourage these men to come forward against the thousands of abusers that are currently smugly running free within society, unaccountable for their crimes, and committing further crimes on a daily basis.
How do I do that when mitigating circumstances are applied in pre-sentencing reports, swaying injustice towards the survivors of these crimes.
James Fowler produced his own little sob story in mitigation (definition to alleviate or render less painful. for the abuser definitelyfor the survivor not in the slightest).
Both of his parents are dead (so what, so are mine and they never understood why I became as rebellious as a child).
He lives in rented property and may loose that property if he goes to jail so what.
His daily routine is restricted to his daily shop, buying a newspaper and then going home. Who verified that inaccurate statement?
Why on Saturday 15th January (2 days before the initial trial) did he smugly approach me in a local store did he think I was frightened of him? When I entered the local mini supermarket, he was at the till paying for his goods. I went to the back of the shop to avoid any confrontation he left the till and came right up next to me with a smug look on his face, and took something from the top shelf. His hand very near to my face my only reaction was to give him a filthy look he has zero contrition and deserves zero mitigation.
I cannot be bothered to comment on the rest of his mitigation its what bulls leave as a deposit in fields!
I listened to several accounts of mitigation in Crown Court, during recent weeks I heard nothing that justified the crimes committed. Every single account was a sob story to achieve sympathy. Mitigation its just an excuse to support the perpetrator and deny the survivors of crime (not all of them survive).
One member of the Support Group wants to use my story, to change the laws in several states in the USA. They currently have what is called The Statute of Limitations. This means that a child can be abused by a paedophile and keep the secret for a number of years! Once the child achieves adulthood and realises that they have suffered injustice, they find that they are denied the right to a trial, because it is historical. All of us in the support group wish to change those laws. If a stronger signal had been sent to James Fowler, this may have been easier to do!
Who is going to monitor James Fowler in the local community? Will the details of his restrictions be posted around the local area, so that everyone knows what he can and cannot do? I know that will not happen!
I have my own home, car and a very good job I need nothing from James Fowler!
The only thing that I required from the court case was closure this I have now been denied due to the lenient sentencing that took place. Instead I only feel anger at the failure of the judicial system, also sorrow for all past and future victims (I have the experiences of over 3000 men to refer to, so I know what Im talking about).
I thought I had received closure on the 17th of January and spent a week in a trance trying to take it all in (one weeks holiday entitlement taken). That closure was finally denied to me on 17th March 2006.
I am proud that I found the courage to come forward after all this time. I am proud of PC Simon Cowan for listening to me, believing me and supporting my quest for justice. I am proud of others within the Police Service for additional support. I am proud that the CPS got it right. I am proud that the Prosecution did a good job (Tim Bubb).
I have seen several reports in the media recently that the government wants to reduce the number of people going to jail! I now believe that as a fact, and that is why James Fowler did not go to jail on Friday 17/03/06!
_______________________________________________
Let's see what reaction I get from that!
Best wishes ...Rik
I am on my way to Witness Care as soon as I log off. The following text is what I am taking with me! There's plenty of it!
___________________________________________
Re:James Fowler case sentencing, Durham Crown Court, Friday 17/03/06.
Dear Sir / Madam I have several concerns over the recent sentencing of James Fowler, and believe that he has merely received a slap on the wrist for the offences of which he is convicted.
During the summing up process, incorrect information was repeatedly stated and subsequently published in The Northern Echo on Saturday 18/03/06.
Printed as follows:
Deborah Sherwin, in mitigation, said: Hes now and elderly gentleman answering for indiscretions which took place when he was aged between 20 and 30.
It would appear that since the 1970s he has not committed any offence of any sort.
1/ The definition of gentleman is: A man of the highest honour, courtesy, and morality. The judge or prosecution should have challenged this description of James Fowler. How does this definition fit a person who has been convicted of multiple acts of child abuse. How does this definition fit a person who, when presented with the initial charges, denied them all (17/10/04). He further denied the charges at numerous subsequent appearances in both Magistrates and Crown Courts. He denied further charges when a second survivor of his crimes came forward. The first time he pleaded guilty was 17th January 2004. This was only because he felt pressure, because the judge on that date was going to allow evidence from a third survivor to be heard. Earlier on that date he was trying to split the two initial cases, so that they would appear as one persons word against another, to a jury. When subsequently appearing for sentence, he requested that his guilty plea be withdrawn, causing further delays and duress. That definition does not apply to a person who lied to the CPS that I had been discussing him in the local community this was not true, as I was anonymous at that point (and still am mostly so) at this point the initial details of his crimes had already been printed in the local Town Crier Publication.
2/ Indiscretions definition: an ill judged act. How on earth is grooming and abusing children seen as in ill judged act. It was a case of multiple planned actions not something that occurred on the spur of the moment. Again this statement should have been challenged in court.
3/ When he was aged between 20 and 30. This was a mathematically incorrect statement:
James Fowler is now 69!
The crimes committed against myself were in 1969 37 years ago, when James Fowler would be 32 years old!
The crimes committed against the second survivor, were stated as being committed in 1977 29 years ago when James Fowler would be 40 years old.
4/ It would appear that since the 1970s he has not committed any offence of any sort.
I first spoke to the police in an official context on the morning of 17/10/04. They then went off to perform a recognition exercise. I was subsequently asked if I would collate an official statement urgently. I later found out (as stated in court) that when the police went to James Fowlers house on that day, young boys were leaving the premises, one had an air rifle that he had been given by James Fowler. During a search of James Fowlers house, further guns were found, that he admitted were for local children. Note there was no mention of any toys being found that were suitable for girls.
I believe that this confirms that he was still intending to groom young boys, and that had I not spoken to the police, the boys seen leaving his house could have been future victims of his activities. I believe that this point should have been argued successfully in court.
Did the Judge, Prosecution or Defence really believe that he was just giving boys guns to be nice to them? Thats what I believed at first when he was grooming me!
During the summing up and sentencing on Friday 17/03/06, I was rather emotional, so could not take in everything that was said. However I feel that due to the issues I have raised above, I need to request a copy of the Summative Transcript from the sentencing day. I understand that I have a right to request this from The Judge, Tony Lancaster
The above are my main concerns, but I also wish to challenge the sentence:
A/ When initially making his guilty plea, Fowler was told to expect a custodial sentence, i.e. He would be going to jail. He subsequently requested that his guilty plea be withdrawn (request was subsequently refused). That means that he added to the duress of myself, witnesses two and three (I have spoken to both of them, so that is a fact). This extended the trial by 2 additional court dates, incurring additional costs for both the crown and others involved in the case. This action alone should have ensured that the sentence was harsher than it would have been initially..
I t appeared in the summing up that he was given some credit for the guilty plea! Why? - he waited until the 17th of January 2006 to make that plea, but tried to withdraw it, meaning that he was trying to force a full trial and deny guilt! He had many opportunities to plead guilty, the first being 17/10/04. I had to keep these events fully in my mind from 17/10/04 to 17/03/06 that is 17 months longer than I should have needed to! Does anyone really care about the survivors of these crimes?
James Fowler has to my knowledge never once expressed regret for what he did, nor apologised!
B/ Judge Tony Lancaster told Fowler: If you were sentenced for such offences committed recently, in my view it would be prison, measured in years.
This comment indicated that a firmer sentencing option would be preferred!
Why, based on that comment was the sentence suspended is the crime any less because it is historical? The comments made in point 4 above, should have ensured a custodial sentence was applied!
It may be argued that a suspended custodial sentence, is still custodial, even though it is suspended. That is like arguing that an oven is hot, merely because it is an oven it does not become hot until someone switches the power on!
C/ This may be a point for MPs, The Attorney General, and The News of the World (Sarahs Law) why is it that the sentence applied is based upon what the sentence would have been in 1969 or 1977? I would appreciate it if someone could by me a house, car, weekly shopping and fuel at either 1969 or 1977 prices.
In summary, I would like a Copy of the Summative Transcript from the Trial. I also wish to appeal against the Insufficient Sentence that I believe was imposed.
I am a member of a support group for male survivors of child sex abuse. The group currently stands at over 3000 strong (two years ago it was only 1600). Each of these individuals have suffered abuse to varying degrees during childhood. The vast majority have not taken their abusers to court they are groomed to keep secrets, then when they feel it is too late to achieve some form of retribution they often give up trying. Many have not told anyone outside of the support group of the crimes that were committed against them.
How do I encourage these men to come forward against the thousands of abusers that are currently smugly running free within society, unaccountable for their crimes, and committing further crimes on a daily basis.
How do I do that when mitigating circumstances are applied in pre-sentencing reports, swaying injustice towards the survivors of these crimes.
James Fowler produced his own little sob story in mitigation (definition to alleviate or render less painful. for the abuser definitelyfor the survivor not in the slightest).
Both of his parents are dead (so what, so are mine and they never understood why I became as rebellious as a child).
He lives in rented property and may loose that property if he goes to jail so what.
His daily routine is restricted to his daily shop, buying a newspaper and then going home. Who verified that inaccurate statement?
Why on Saturday 15th January (2 days before the initial trial) did he smugly approach me in a local store did he think I was frightened of him? When I entered the local mini supermarket, he was at the till paying for his goods. I went to the back of the shop to avoid any confrontation he left the till and came right up next to me with a smug look on his face, and took something from the top shelf. His hand very near to my face my only reaction was to give him a filthy look he has zero contrition and deserves zero mitigation.
I cannot be bothered to comment on the rest of his mitigation its what bulls leave as a deposit in fields!
I listened to several accounts of mitigation in Crown Court, during recent weeks I heard nothing that justified the crimes committed. Every single account was a sob story to achieve sympathy. Mitigation its just an excuse to support the perpetrator and deny the survivors of crime (not all of them survive).
One member of the Support Group wants to use my story, to change the laws in several states in the USA. They currently have what is called The Statute of Limitations. This means that a child can be abused by a paedophile and keep the secret for a number of years! Once the child achieves adulthood and realises that they have suffered injustice, they find that they are denied the right to a trial, because it is historical. All of us in the support group wish to change those laws. If a stronger signal had been sent to James Fowler, this may have been easier to do!
Who is going to monitor James Fowler in the local community? Will the details of his restrictions be posted around the local area, so that everyone knows what he can and cannot do? I know that will not happen!
I have my own home, car and a very good job I need nothing from James Fowler!
The only thing that I required from the court case was closure this I have now been denied due to the lenient sentencing that took place. Instead I only feel anger at the failure of the judicial system, also sorrow for all past and future victims (I have the experiences of over 3000 men to refer to, so I know what Im talking about).
I thought I had received closure on the 17th of January and spent a week in a trance trying to take it all in (one weeks holiday entitlement taken). That closure was finally denied to me on 17th March 2006.
I am proud that I found the courage to come forward after all this time. I am proud of PC Simon Cowan for listening to me, believing me and supporting my quest for justice. I am proud of others within the Police Service for additional support. I am proud that the CPS got it right. I am proud that the Prosecution did a good job (Tim Bubb).
I have seen several reports in the media recently that the government wants to reduce the number of people going to jail! I now believe that as a fact, and that is why James Fowler did not go to jail on Friday 17/03/06!
_______________________________________________
Let's see what reaction I get from that!
Best wishes ...Rik
