A CLITHEROE paedophile who sexually abused a 10-year-old girl and took vile photographs of her will stay in prison indefinitely after failing in an Appeal Court bid to overturn his potentially lifelong sentence.
Glenn Yates, 41, caused “immense and incalculable” harm to the schoolgirl after pressuring her into sex offences and making her pose for images, which he added to his collection of child pornography.
Yates, of Hayhurst Street, was handed an open-ended prison sentence — almost identical to a life term — at Preston Crown Court in September 2009 after he was convicted of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
The judge ordered that Yates, who also admitted child porn offences, could not be released until the Parole Board was satisfied it would be safe to do so. An attempt to challenge his tough sentence was later rejected by the Appeal Court after it ruled that the judge was right to find him a “dangerous” offender.
Now three senior judges have rejected his bid to relaunch his appeal via the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) — which probes potential miscarriages of justice — saying it would “not be right” to do so.
Had Yates been successful in an appeal, he would have been eligible for immediate release.
The sex crimes came to light more than five years ago after police raided Yates' home and discovered on a computer images he had taken of the victim posing nude and in her underwear.
They also discovered 85 indecent images of other children, which he had downloaded. During another search of his home, months later, police found a further cache containing 41 indecent images of children. Despite Yates denying that he abused the young girl, he was found guilty by a jury and jailed.
The trial judge said he presented a “high risk” of re-offending and slapped him with an indeterminate jail sentence.
The Court of Appeal later refused to soften Yates’ overall sentence, despite making minor, academic amendments to some aspects of the concurrent sentences for the offences involving images.
After a referral by the CCRC, the Appeal Court has now corrected further inconsequential elements of his sentence but refused a bid by Yates to re-boot his appeal against his overall punishment.
Matthew Stanbury, for Yates, argued that the court should reconsider whether the sentencing judge should have handed him a sentence which guaranteed his release at some point.
But Lord Justice Davis, sitting with two other judges, said: “We conclude that it would not be right to grant approval in the form sought by Mr Stanbury.”