John Kettle's Social Media Accounts
Know a Social Media Account Linked to John Kettle?
Want to add information? Log in to your account to contribute accounts and phone numbers.
JOHN KETTLE FROM BEDWYN FAILS TO REDUCE SEVEN-YEAR JAIL SENTENCE FOR CHILD SEX ABUSE
In February 2014, a man from Bedwyn named John Kettle faced a decisive ruling from the highest courts regarding his imprisonment for heinous crimes involving a young girl. Kettle, aged 57 and residing in Little Bedwyn, was convicted of committing multiple sexual offenses against an eight-year-old girl, leading to a substantial prison sentence that he later challenged in an attempt to have it shortened.Specifically, Kettle was found guilty of three counts of indecent assault at Dorchester Crown Court in August of the previous year. The severity of his crimes and the impact on the young victim prompted the court to impose a sentence of seven and a half years in prison, a decision that Kettle sought to appeal, claiming that his punishment was excessively harsh.
During the appeal hearing, Kettle’s legal representatives argued that the original sentencing judge had overstepped, suggesting that the punishment did not align with the nature of the offenses or the circumstances of the case. They contended that the sentence was disproportionate and sought a reduction.
However, the appeal was firmly rejected by the panel of judges, including Lord Justice Davis, Mr Justice Supperstone, and Judge Nicholas Hilliard QC. Judge Hilliard, in particular, emphasized the gravity of the crimes committed by Kettle. He remarked that, at the time of the abuse, the young girl was seeking only attention, but what she ultimately remembered was the trauma of being assaulted.
In dismissing the appeal, Judge Hilliard stated, “The sentence of seven and a half years was undoubtedly a very severe one, but these were very serious offences. This sentence was not manifestly excessive.” The court reaffirmed that the punishment was appropriate given the nature of the offenses and the need for justice for the victim. The ruling underscored the judiciary’s stance on protecting vulnerable children and ensuring that offenders receive appropriate sentences for such grave crimes.
