Abuser 'took my childhood away'

PAEDOPHILES must be made to serve longer jail sentences to keep children safe and create a real deterrent, says a man who suffered years of abuse as a child.

Abuser 'gave me a life sentence'
Abuser 'gave me a life sentence'

PAEDOPHILES must be made to serve longer jail sentences to keep children safe and create a real deterrent, says a man who suffered years of abuse as a child.

The victim – who tells his story for the first time in today’s JEP – has called for a review of the Royal Court’s sentencing policy for child sex offences after the news that the man who abused him decades ago has recently been jailed again, this time for sex crimes in Bulgaria.

He says that his abuser, Paul Renouf, served three years of a five-year sentence for abusing him and another child before being released in 2004. Last week Renouf was jailed again in Bulgaria for paying a poor family to let him abuse their young children.

Read his harrowing interview in today's JEP.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

Comments for: "Abuser 'took my childhood away'"


He is a vile man and should be locked up for life... he is a risk to society .. how could be let free to go and offend again....

The sentence these sex offender get is an insult to the victims ...

CASTRATION for any forced sexual activity



I never understand why someone is sentenced to 5, and gets out in 3. usually for good behaviour. whats the point in sentencing for 5 years in the first place. I dont care if theyve been good in prison, they still did the crime. Do the crime, do the time.

Even then - 5 yrs is still a joke for what he did.


What about tattooing something on their forehead so everybody around the world would know to stay away from them...

the wanted

There is a real reluctance to hand out harsh sentences to paedophiles in Jersey.

I would be interested to know why the government and authorities have continually swept things under the carpet for years.

Something does not add up.

Annette Liron

Put paedophiles away for life. I am appalled at the leniency given to these vile people. The damage, physical and emotional is something abused children have to deal with during their entire life, so why not life sentences for paedonphiles?

Blue Knight

Child abuse isn't just about paedophiles, it also includes physical assaults.

I can recall a case when offenders, who admitted in the Royal Court, that they had caused numerous fractures to an infant,received a non custodial sentence. That was a totally unsatisfacory outcome, but there appeared to be no system to complain against this result.

The Artist

mmmm.... I agree, what is going on that killers get 8 years, paedophiles 3 years.... this is not justice!!!!!! its a joke.

Tatoo their forehead, cut it off, chuck them in jail and throw away the key!!!!!!


You would think that after the Haut De La Garenne case that those in power in Jersey would have got together and brought in longer jail terms for these sick,vile scum bags,but no.There is something very wrong with the Justice system in Jersey and our States Members who turn a blind eye to whats going on.


Totaly agree with the comments made above, why are our Judges so soft on paedophiles? Light sentances for these scum are now the norm in Jersey some thing is very wrong! It almost sends out a signal to the world at large that Jersey is open to paedophiles God forbid JEP please do something run articles for a change in sentancing for these vile crimes

A worried mother...

Thankfully, Jersey Courts are well known for handing down harsher sentences for drug related crimes. In light of recent events, why can't the island also be renown for how it deals with child abusers? Only the abusers would disagree with this sentiment. Harsher sentences please.

Something for a politician worth their salt to take forward to States debate/chambers...


Only the abusers and those people who have taken the time to study the data at hand and know that longer jail sentences in themselves do not deter sex offenders. Naturally this is an emotive issue but not an excuse to switch our brains off.


Thank you Renegade,

Indeed child abusers deserve our compassion as well as our disgust.

Apart from the purely opportunistic violations (which are rare in the more serious cases where the victim is younger or even pre-pubescent) the perpetrators are largely unable to modify their appetites or behaviour because it is a sexual orientation which cannot realistically be changed.

Paedophiles literally cannot help themselves, poor things.

Fortunately the paedophilic appetites that these suffers are enslaved to can be reduced and managed by medical treatment. The most effective and compassionate treatment available is chemical or physical emasculation.

Chemical emasculation has had failures n other parts of the world where the patient has deliberately stopped taking their medication, so perhaps the physical option would be most effective.

This emasculation could be partial for a first offence if it was not too 'serious'.

The treatment could also be made available for the most serious and serial non-paedophilic sex offenders.

Imprisonment may turn out to be completely unnecessary.

We would value your 'expert' input. My intuition ..... or was it your unprovoked demeaning treatment of "A worried mother" ............ somehow tells me that you are not going to be keen on the idea.

Be a man and prove me wrong.

Lianne x.

A worried mother

Well put Lianne; I totally agree.

But the reality of administering chemical castration occurring in Jersey as a humane alternative to lifelong imprisonment or surgical castration is slim due to concerns over human rights and possible ‘side effects’ (regardless of studies proving the procedure diminishes desires for deviant sexual behaviour).

I am no “expert” (as you allude to be Renegade)…but as “A worried mother” I agree with “Sanity” below. Lock them up. Remove them from circulation. Keep our children safe. Any chance, even if it is slim, of a child being abused should be extinguished.

What was that old wives mantra…oh yes, “Prevention is as good as a cure”.


Well at the risk of sounding demeaning do you have any research to support the notion that castration is an effective way of reducing offending?

Certainly when it was tried in California it didn't bring down sex crimes any more than the national trend where crime across the US is falling... remember what I said about letting your emotions run away with you rather than rely on facts?

As for being an expert, it's nothing you can't discover by reading a few newspapers and keeping an eye on the internet. One of my favourite subscriptions is to Crimeline which is a resource for Legal Aid Solicitors in the UK for instance - a little research allows you to use facts to form your opinions rather than making vague assumptions, you might want to consider it. :-)


@Worried mother : This isn't prevention you're talking about. If you want to discuss prevention, please see my post below.

Also, my girlfriend has just pointed out, this wouldn't do much to stop female sex offenders like the Social Worker from a couple of years ago. Any thoughts on that? :-)


Renegade – Whilst jail may not deter it prevents them from re-offending whilst they are safely locked up. You only need to look back through the records of any court to find that the serious issues are with repeat offenders, sometimes with 6 or more prior convictions. The public have a “human right” to live safely which should override these animals right to re-offend.


I would like to see an approach more oriented towards preventing these offences. If you want to lock every sex offender up for life I hope you're happy to double your tax bill and then some, it costs us around 600 a week to keep someone in prison - whenever people start clamouring about locking them up, I always remind them of this fact and ask if they'd like to foot the bill, no taker so far...

So if that won't work, what will?

Well, I think we do need to raise public awareness of the Multi Agency Protection Arrangements that have been introduced recently to identify children who are at risk and the fact that organisations such as schools, the Police and Social Services collaborate to share information and prevent children from being in a harmful situation.

For convicted offenders, aside from having a formalised system of treatment and therapy for Sex Offenders (from reading the last Annual Prison Report this doesn't seem to be the case but I am very happy to be corrected!) - I would suggest we employ technology more to monitor them.

As it stands the Police have the right to enter their home at any time and inspect their computers to make sure that they haven't been in contact with children or other vulnerable people or viewing anything inappropriate - indeed it's an offence for them to own or use a device in such a way that conceals the history.

Tagging is also excellent but I think we need to have the newer kind which actually work underground for instance(!) - also perhaps in combination with a warning system which lets us know when they go near high risk areas e.g an ex's place or a school.

A little about raising awareness - the Police have done a lot about this but we've had several high profile incidents in the past year or so where a woman has been attacked walking home on her own. Yes yes, I know it's not her fault etc. etc. but in the same way if I don't lock my car I'll probably find my valuables missing from it, it's not a particularly good idea.

In terms of online predators, the message should be hammered home in schools and via parenting organisations that the only safe way to use the internet is to have a single family PC in a communal area and for an adult to be present when a child is using the internet - I had to deal with this restriction from when I was 12 to about the age of 15, I am sure modern kids can live with it.

A worried mother

I agree with your suggestions above Renegade. However, I feel you are missing the point of the article. It is about “tougher sentences to keep children safe and create a REAL deterrent” not remedial and/or monitoring of the culprit once the offence has been committed.

I agree with the gentleman who provoked the release of this article. The Royal Court’s sentencing policy should be reviewed for this type of offence. As it currently stands, the sentencing tariff appears quite lenient in comparison to other serious offences.

The point I was attempting to make is when found guilty…lock them up…for longer. And yes, I would quite happily contribute to the bill. You’d struggle to find a tax-paying parent who wouldn’t. Money well spent by the Government.

I stand by my original sentiment. Prevention is as good as a cure (I struggle to believe that this type of defunct mind can be ‘cured’). If they are safely tucked up in their cell how can they re-offend? And that is the point of the victim’s statement above. His abuser served 3 of the 5 years (not enough, not enough by a long shot) only to re-offend. I wonder what ‘therapy’ he underwent whilst incarcerated…it obviously didn’t work.

As nauseating as I can imagine it to be, the thought of monitoring a paedophile or sex offender would be easier to do from the right side of the cell door surely?

As for female castration, most child sexual abuse is committed by men, but I see your girlfriend’s point. My response…lock them up for longer too.


Hi worried mother,

Sorry for not responding sooner but I have been laid up with a cold.

I appreciate your point of view but there simply is no data to support the notion that longer jail sentences deter offenders except in the obvious sense as you say that there are no children in prison.

However, that doesn't mean a jail sentence is a preventative measure - by definition it can only be applied after the fact -true prevention occurs when we detect the crime and stop it before it can occur, hence the suggestions I outlined above.

It simply isn't practical to keep sex offenders locked away indefinitely (we can't afford it!) so given that we have to let them out eventually, people often believe that castration is the answer.

Aside from the human rights concerns (and yes, sex offenders do have certain rights too particularly given the huge number of false accusations), it's not a particularly effective deterrent - the British government used chemical castration to try to combat homosexuality amongst men until the mid seventies, I needn't tell you it didn't prove to be very effective!

However, whether we adopt a rehabilitative punishment whereby we imprison them by all means but have workshops specifically designed to deter their offending behaviour combined with close monitoring after release or simply reach for the rack and thumbscrews, we need to CATCH them first.

You've already seen some of the ways I've suggested to prevent reoffending.

Some of the other methods I'd introduce would be for there to be a permanent presence on Social Networking sites by the local Police - impersonating minors online so that offenders will not be able to know who they're speaking to. (See Dateline's "To Catch a Predator" on Youtube for an idea of what I'm talking about).

I'm happy to make a deal with the "lock 'em and throw away the key" brigade as a result - you support my methods for tracking down these buggers and I'll support whatever punishment you see fit, however as I said you will probably find it's not an effective deterrent.


...Just picked up on your comment about serious issues being with repeat offenders.

Recidivism amongst sex offenders is indeed high but all the cases I've read about recently have been first time offences, I wish we could correspond by e-mail, I could name names!