Grim, but as far as the legal technicalities are concerned an interesting case about the nature of sexual consent
Wisbech taxi driver sexually abused disabled woman '30 times' and charged her for ithttps://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... g-17059208He took money from her each time the abuse took place
Image: Cambridge NewsAn impotent taxi driver sexually assaulted a severely-disabled woman "around 30 times" and took money from her each time during a sickening catalogue of abuse.
James Reilly, from Church Drove, Wisbech, began a sexual relationship with his victim, a wheelchair-bound woman, in 2016 after they met through his work.
Tim Forster, prosecuting at Cambridge Crown Court today (Wednesday October 9), said: “The line began to be crossed when he began to take her on trips to the doctors and shopping.”
“During one of his visits, he initiated sexual contact with her, telling her to get onto her bed.”
Reilly, 73 and now retired, had been suffering from erectile dysfunction since around 2010, the court heard, so he was unable to engage in penetrative sex with his victim.
However, he had attempted to use olive oil as a lubricant, which he kept in the victim’s wardrobe during later visits.
The abuse included Reilly spending as long as 90 minutes at a time attempting to initiate full sexual intercourse with her.
Mr Forster said: “This could go on for as much as an hour and a half, according to the victim. Nothing was said as this went on.”
“When he finished, he would wash himself, go put his coat on, say he was going for a smoke and then he would leave.”
The court also heard that Reilly had been charging the victim, initially taking £10 per visit, later increasing the price to £20.
“She didn’t know why he was charging her,” Mr Forster said.
“He would ask for money after the sex was over.”
The incidents continued for around a year, by which time Reilly had abused his victim “around 30 times”.
In a report read out to the court and Judge Stuart Bridge, forensic psychologist Jennifer Cutler noted the victim’s cognitive ability was “below that of 99.9% of individuals of her age,” coming to the conclusion that she “lacked the functional capacity to consent to sex".
Married Reilly however claimed it was a “mutual sexual relationship”, saying the abuse was him “just having fun” according to statements read out by Mr Forster.
Michael Burrows, defending, said the fallout from the abuse had also affected Reilly’s family.
Reilly’s wife owns an at-home care company which also employs the couple’s son, the court heard.
Since the incidents have come to light, the business has struggled and no longer receives business from councils in Cambridge or Norwich.
“He knows he’s responsible for all the distress, and he knows it’s a burden he will always have to bear,” Mr Burrows said.
Judge Stuart Bridge noted the routine nature of the abuse when delivering his verdict.
He said: “A pattern was established. When you arrived at her property, you would wheel her into her bedroom, her clothes would be taken off and there would be the intimacy.”
“A particularly unattractive part of your visits was that you charged her £10 and then £20 for each visit.”
Being sentenced for a count of sexual activity with a mentally-disordered female, Reilly was handed four years in prison, half of which will be served behind bars.
He was also added to the Sex Offenders' Register and a restraining order was issued to prevent him contacting his victim.
Login
Register
FAQ
