Masked Newport rapist loses bid to reduce sentence (From South Wales Argus)
Get involved: Send your photos, video, news & views by texting ARGUS NEWS to 80360 or email
us
Masked Newport rapist loses bid to reduce sentence
2:42pm Thursday 21st March 2013 in News
Gareth Ralph Gregg
A MASKED rapist who attacked a woman after watching violent pornography lost his appeal against his potentially lifelong sentence today.
Gareth Ralph Gregg, 28, of St Julians in Newport, wore a rubber mask and attacked the woman in her own home in September 2009.
He was convicted of two counts of rape and sentenced to indefinite imprisonment for public protection (IPP) at Cardiff Crown Court in July 2010 with a minimum term of at least 11 years.
Almost identical to a life term, the IPP sentence meant Gregg would stay in prison until the Parole Board is satisfied he is no longer a risk of harm to women - potentially for life.
He appealed at London's Court of Appeal yesterday, but three senior judges rejected his complaints.
Mr Justice Mitting said Gregg watched violent pornography before going to the woman's house where he throttled and raped her.
The woman called police but in the meantime, Gregg went home, watched more violent porn and flirted with another woman on Facebook.
His victim was left battered, having been throttled until she submitted, and was left so traumatised she had been unable to go back home.
The sentencing judge, then Recorder of Cardiff Nicholas Cooke QC, said he could not be certain of a time when Gregg would no longer be dangerous and so imposed the open-ended term.
Yesterday, defence barrister James Dixon argued before Lord Justice Leveson, Mr Justice Mitting and Mr Justice Field that the sentence was too harsh.
The crown court judge should have considered whether a sentence with a guaranteed release, but extra supervision when freed, would have been sufficient, he said.
Mr Justice Mitting said: "We have no reason whatsoever to think that the recorder didn't consider such a disposal and didn't reject it, correctly in our judgment, as inadequate to meet the danger that this appellant poses. A sentence of imprisonment for public protection was, in our view, the right sentence to impose."
Comments(6)
sherbetdip
says...
8:29pm Thu 21 Mar 13
bladerunner
says...
8:33pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Gooding
says...
11:58pm Thu 21 Mar 13
Nataliee93
says...
12:33am Fri 22 Mar 13
philgwent
says...
9:58am Fri 22 Mar 13
MR DUDLEY says...
4:40pm Thu 21 Mar 13