A 21-year-old man was yesterday jailed for six years after being found guilty of having sex with a girl of 13 - his second such conviction in less than a year.

The nine-woman three-man jury gasped in disbelief when a Police officer read David Franklin Burrows' previous convictions to the court and revealed he was already serving a prison term for the same offence.

Burrows, of no fixed abode, is in Westgate after being sentenced last July to two-and-a-half years for having sex with a girl under 14.

And the court heard that while on bail for that matter, Burrows also fathered twins with a 15-year-old girl.

The babies are now six months old. The jury took just over three hours to reach a majority verdict yesterday afternoon after the three-day trial.

Before sentencing, the paedophile was asked if he had anything to say, to which he responded: “I ain't got nothing to say.”

Assistant Justice Archibald Warner sentenced Burrows to six years in prison - to run consecutively to his current sentence.

Assistant Justice Warner said: “I have considered the views of both the prosecution and the defence, the age of the defendant, his previous convictions for similar offences, and that he showed no remorse and put the complainant through a full trial.

“I sentence you to six years to run consecutive to the current sentence.”

But as the sex offender was led from the court, he turned to the judge and said: “Have a nice day - you punk ass b**ch.”

Burrows had flatly denied the charge of unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 14 throughout the trial, but had admitted knowing her.

He said he had only played football, gone swimming and biking with her during the summer of 2001, but at no time had they had sex.

However, the girl, now 15, told the jury that she and Burrows had had sex on the couch of his home four or five times over a period of two months when she was just aged 13.

Although defence lawyer Larry Mussenden suggested she was “unsure” of the facts and had “fantasized” about certain points, she told the court she was sure that she did have sex with Burrows, who was then aged between 19 and 20.

Prosecutor Charmaine Smith told the court that Burrows had previous convictions - but did not reveal what they were for - and said he was currently incarcerated, and could therefore not be trusted.

And she spoke about the teenager's shy demeanour when giving her evidence and said she had remained the same when she gave evidence during her evidence and Mr. Mussenden's cross examination.

“She remained soft spoken and was continually asked to speak up,” said Mrs. Smith.

She said that Mr. Mussenden was trying to show that the girl had made the entire story up because she was pressurised into telling her story to the Police by her mother.

But the prosecutor asked why the 15-year-old would want to come to court and tell a story of having underaged sex to a group of strangers, and questioned what she would have gained from it.

Mrs. Smith suggested that the defendant did not want to spend any more time in prison and that was the reason why he was denying the charges.

But Mr. Mussenden, in summing up his case on Tuesday, had suggested to the jury that the prosecution had nothing to stand its case on.

He said: “The burden of proof rests on the prosecution and they have not satisfied you of the man's guilt.”

He said the young girl was unable to tell the court exactly how many times they had had sex or where they had had sex.

He said in his summation: “The prosecution's evidence was unbelievable, unreliable and of no assistance to this jury.”

But when Assistant Justice Warner asked the jury consider the case yesterday, he suggested they look at the facts of the case in terms of law, and not morality.

He said: “It did not matter whether the girl consented to having sex with the man; it doesn't matter whether you think she liked it or did it before. If it is your opinion that she had sexual intercourse with him, then you must find him guilty.”