A paedophile bus driver who groomed an autistic teenager before swapping explicit pictures with him over Facebook has had his ‘too soft’ jail term doubled by top judges.
Jason Foster was locked up for two years at Manchester Crown Court in June, after admitting six counts of sexual activity with a child and three of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
But the 46-year-old, of Ivor Street, Rochdale, has had his sentence increased to four years by judges sitting at London’s Criminal Appeal Court, who said the original term was ‘unduly lenient’ for his serious crimes.
Foster groomed the boy by giving him sweets and showering him with gifts before engaging in a series of seedy Facebook chats over a 12-month period, the court heard.
He eventually managed to persuade the vulnerable youngster to send an intimate picture of himself.
His sickening abuse of the teenager came to light when the boy confided in his mother and another adult about the online messages.
The court heard he had targeted the boy because he was vulnerable and Foster believed he was more likely to agree to his perverted demands.
A probation report revealed he showed no remorse for his actions, posed a high risk to children, and was likely to have carried on targeting the boy if he hadn’t been reported.
Lord Justice Fulford told the court: “This, in our judgment, was extremely serious offending, most particularly because the victim was deliberately targeted on account of his vulnerability, which made him more likely to be compliant.
“This case bears all the hallmarks of deliberate grooming, beginning with flattery, gifts and attention, and thereafter developing over time into serious sexual abuse.
“If the victim hadn’t reported the matter when he did, it is inevitable this abuse would have developed in seriousness.
“Selecting a victim of such vulnerability is a particular aggravating feature in this case.”
Lawyers acting on behalf of the Attorney General, Jeremy Wright QC, argued the term handed to Foster was far too short.
Increasing the sentence, Lord Justice Fulford said that two years may have been an appropriate sentence for a single incident.
But it was ‘unduly lenient’ in light of the repeated offending against the teenager.
