The court of appeal has overturned a decision not to jail a man who abused a pre-teenage girl.

Charles Cover, of Christian Street, Peel, was yesterday jailed for 21 months by Judge of Appeal Jeremy Storey QC and Deemster Alastair Montgomerie.

The 66-year-old was found guilty by a jury at the Court of General Gaol Delivery in February.

Between May 2015 and July 2016, Cover assaulted a young girl in a motor home. She was aged between 11 and 12 at the time.

But in July Deemster Kainth chose to follow a social inquiry report which recommended a suspended sentence to allow for one-to-one probation. It said custody would not stop him reoffending.

There was a public outcry at the sentence and Attorney General John Quinn, represented in court by James Robinson, who prosecuted Cover at his trial, appealed against that sentence on the grounds of ’undue leniency’.

Mr Robinson told the court that while the Isle of Man’s courts are bound by the 1992 Act, recent court decisions show that ’sentencing in sexual cases has moved on’.

He said this resulted in ’greater awareness’ of the impact of sexual assaults on the victim. He described the existing law as ’not adequate’ and noted the Sexual Offences and Obscene Publications Bill, which is currently making it way through Tynwald, will bring the Manx courts in line with England and Wales.

During the July sentencing, Mr Robinson pushed for a 24-month custodial sentence for Cover, while defence advocate Ian Kermode began with the starting point of a 20-month recommendation.

However, Justice Storey and Deemster Montgomerie said they were hampered in understanding how Deemster Kainth had decided on an 18-month suspended sentence as he had not noted his starting point or any credit he was giving Cover when he sentenced him.

Mr Robinson said that in the mind of the AG Cover should be given ’very little if any credit’ after he was found guilty following a contested trial.

Justice Storey noted that ’to this day’ Cover has never admitted the offences or shown any remorse for his actions.

His lack of remorse or admission of guilt, coupled with making his victim relive the trauma of his actions showed that the suspended sentence and probation order ’was unduly lenient’, Mr Robinson argued.

Addressing what he called the ’elephant in the room’, Mr Robinson asked what message the suspended sentence gave to the public and what impact it had on public confidence in the court.

Noting the widespread coverage of the case, he said: ’That sentence is capable of, and has, had an impact on public confidence.’

He added: ’Public confidence has been undermined by this case.’

In closing, Mr Robinson said: ’I ask you to carefully consider the effect on this young girl, she has had a significant part of her childhood taken from her.’

Defence advocate Mr Kermode told the court that they could only change the sentence handed down by Deemster Kainth if they believed it to be unduly lenient, not just if they themselves would have been minded to impose a different sentence.

Mr Kermode said that, as he saw it, Deemster Kainth’s sentence was ’within the range of appropriate sentencing’.

He said that in his sentencing remarks, Deemster Kainth had commented that Cover was fortunate not to be in England and Wales, where sentences for these offences are currently higher.

However, he added that since we’re not in England and Wales, he could only use these as guidelines but within the maximum sentences available by Manx law.

Mr Kermode said that to suspend a sentence, a Deemster needs ’a good reason’ and in the case of Cover, Deemster Kainth had heard the evidence throughout the trial and was ’best placed to evaluate the considerations’ before sentencing.

Moving to Cover’s refusal to admit his guilt or show remorse, Mr Kermode said: ’It is because of his denial and because of that lack of remorse that probation is necessary.’

He added that the social inquiry report had recommended that the courts ’step back’ from handing down a custodial sentence and said that Deemster Kainth had ’identified a need and imposed the appropriate sentence’.

Mr Kermode also criticised Mr Robinson for saying the sentencing had impact public confidence.

’What evidence is there at all that public confidence has been undermined by this case,’ he asked.

Recognising the widespread public upset at the sentence, Justice Storey said: ’We don’t need members of the public to come along and tell us. In fact that would be highly inappropriate.’

However Mr Kermode replied: ’Disappointment in a sentence is different from public confidence.’

Justice Storey and Deemster Montgomerie quashed the suspended sentence set by Deemster Kainth and sentenced Cover to 21 months for gross indecency and indecent assault of a minor, with these sentences to run concurrently.

Cover will still be placed on the sex offenders’ register and be subject to a sexual offences prevention order for seven years.