A Warwick man with intellectual disabilities was yesterday sentenced to two years in prison for sexually touching a young girl.

Magistrate Auralee Cassidy told the court that while Cameron Sousa-Saints, 27, was entitled to a discount because of his mental impairment, sexual offences against children caused the victims lasting harm.

However, Paul Wilson, counsel for Sousa-Saints, told the court that he had filed an appeal against the sentence before it was delivered “out of an abundance of caution”.

He said: “We are doing what we feel we must in order for him, being a vulnerable person, to avoid a custodial sentence. We do not feel it is in his best interests.”

Sousa-Saints had denied a charge that he sexually touched a young person on an unknown date between July 2016 and August 2018.

During his trial last year, Magistrates’ Court heard that the victim, who was under the age of 14, had gone to the defendant’s house to watch a film with other children.

The victim said that when she was temporarily left alone with the defendant, he exposed himself to her and urged her to have sexual contact with him.

The victim wrote about the incident in a journal, but did not tell her family until 2023 because she was “scared and disgusted”.

Ms Cassidy initially dismissed the case against Sousa-Saints on the basis that he had a mental impairment that hindered his understanding of his actions.

She wrote in her judgment that she accepted the evidence of the victim, but the medical evidence before the court showed he lacked the mens rea — a Latin phrase meaning “guilty mind” — to commit the offence.

However, that decision was overturned by the Supreme Court, which ruled that she had misapplied medical evidence in the case.

Puisne Judge Alan Richards said that only one of the reports was prepared with knowledge of the allegations, and it focused on his ability to enter a plea, rather than whether he could have acted with a sexual purpose.

Mr Justice Richards ruled that the matter should be sent back to Ms Cassidy to enter a finding of guilt and deliver a sentence.

During a sentencing hearing yesterday, both Karim Nelson, for the Crown, and Mr Wilson said that Ms Cassidy should consider the medical reports when determining the appropriate sentence.

Mr Nelson said that while Sousa-Saints’ mental impairment did not affect his liability for the offence, it could play a role in his culpability.

However, he also noted that the defendant had licences to drive a motorcycle, car and light truck, questioning if he should be allowed to drive at all if his level of impairment was as described in the reports.

Mr Nelson added that the recording of a conviction against Sousa-Saints was a matter of vindication for the “courageous” child victim.

He said: “It doesn’t need to be prison, but there has to be some level of culpability.”

Mr Wilson said that the court consider the medical evidence to ensure that a tailored approach was taken to his sentence rather than a blanket approach.

Ms Cassidy said that while the case might not have involved physical injury, child victims of sexual offences suffered a serious loss of innocence and trust that could never be reclaimed.

She added that in all the circumstances a conditional discharge was not appropriate and that the custody threshold had been crossed.

Ms Cassidy said the appropriate sentence for the offence was 2½ years behind bars, but reduced the sentence to two years on account of Sousa-Saint’s mental impairment.

The magistrate further ordered that the defendant be added to the sex offenders register.

After the sentence was delivered, Mr Wilson called on the court to stay the sentence pending appeal, stating that he had filed an appeal against the sentence to the Supreme Court before the sentence was handed down.

Ms Cassidy responded that the sentence had been delivered and any application for bail pending appeal should be directed to the Supreme Court.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers