A father has been sentenced to 18 years imprisonment after the court found him guilty on eight counts of sexual related charges with his daughter.

The man, who could not be named as it may identify the victim, was reported as the biological father of the victim.

Justice David Chetwynd said when delivering the judgment, that the father was blaming his wife for encouraging their daughter to report the matter to the police in which he has already confessed to the church and has been forgiven by God.

The father had previous criminal convictions some 17 years ago and most of those offences were related to rape, which helped to aggravate this present case.

On the charge of sexual intercourse without consent (count 1), the father was sentenced to 18 years imprisonment and ordered the other rape charges to be run concurrently with count one.

In relation to each count of incest (count 7, 8 and 10) the defendant was given eight years imprisonment and shall be served concurrently.

The offences were committed prior to the effective date of the amendment of the Penal Code Act on February 24, 2016 when the penalty of incest was increased to 15 years imprisonment.

The father was sentenced to another eight years imprisonment for the act of indecency with a young person but all those charges will run concurrently with other counts.

During the trial, none of the evidence adduced by the victim was challenged by her father.

The sexual abuse dated back to 2007 when the victim was eight years old.

The Court had heard that the abuse began with the father touching her inappropriately.

This progressed to a point when in 2010 he took her clothes off, touched her breast and digitally penetrated her.

In giving her evidence the victim could not recall exactly when and how often that happened in 2010 but she recalled a similar incident in 2011.

The victim had told the Court that her father threatened to beat her if she fails to comply.

The judge in his ruling said the question of consent does not arise there because of the age of the victim at that time.

In 2012, there were further incidents of digital penetrations and inappropriate touching and the father even demanded his daughter to touch his private part and this was after her father made her watch pornographic videos on his phone.

Justice Chetwynd said that the final straw for the victim was in 2015 when she endured another similar incident.

It was after this incident that the victim decided to tell her mother who then made a report to the police.

In every encounter, the father threatened to kill his daughter if she ever told her mother or anyone else about his lustful activities.

The judge said the father did not deny at one stage he took a branch of kasis when he was abusing his daughter.

The father felt no remorse for what he has done to his daughter and claimed that his church does not believe in custom reconciliation and sees no need to perform one, the Court judgment stated.

Before considering his sentencing equation the Supreme Court judge said that the evidence in this case are clearly of severe aggravating factors and involved a father who started abusing his daughter at early age and continued until she was 10 years of age.

Justice Chetwynd said it was a continuous humiliating and corrupting behavior by a father towards someone he should have sheltered and protected.

“This was a shameful breach of trust.

“The offences occurred in or near the family home, a place the victim should have felt safe and secure in.

“The sexual abuse of the young child caused pain but fortunately does not appear to have resulted in permanent physical harm but one can only imagine the psychological damage she has suffered.”

The judge said that much abuse appears to have been planned and some included the use of pornographic material which the victim was coerced into watching.

Taking the aggravating factors into account, the judge said the offending is likely to attract a sentence of no less than 18 years imprisonment.

He said that there are no mitigating factors in the case since the father has shown no remorse for what he has done and maintained his innocence claiming he was forgiven by God.

The judge said that the father is not entitled to any reduction for a guilty plea.

“He has maintained not guilty pleas and was convicted after trial and just as he shows no remorse, the defendant accepts no guilt and told the probation officer that he will never plead guilty to any offence as he believes God has already forgiven him in 2015,” he said.

The court then ruled the sentence to take immediate effect.