Neal Keeling

January 11, 2010

A WHEELCHAIR-bound man of 88 has been jailed for abusing two young sisters more than 40 years ago. Thomas Burton, who has been sent to prison for two years, is believed to be the oldest person in Britain to be locked up for such crimes.

His sentence is a triumph for the women. One of them tracked him down to his home in Middleton, Rochdale, in 1992. She reported Burton but police said they could not prosecute. But she went to his home again in 2008 and made another complaint.

This time, with her sister also making a complaint, police were able to take action.

Abuse victim's bravery brings justice

Burton pleaded guilty at Bolton Crown Court to three offences against one of the sisters. A judge ordered that seven alleged offences against the other sister should lie on file. Both girls were under 11 at the time.

Burton targeted the girls between 1962-68. He pleaded guilty to two sexual assaults on a child under 13 for which he was sentenced to eight months on each charge to run concurrently.

He also admitted gross indecency with a child under 13, for which he was given a 16-month sentence.

The elder sister, now in her fifties, said:

He pleaded guilty. Hope his mind was bright. Doesn't say why he was in a wheelchair or if this chap suffered from mental health problems. He's possibly guilty. Possibly another gross miscarriage of justice has just darkened the sky.

88 must be a new record. Imagine being in the last throws of life, spittle dribbling down your chin and being told your are under arrest...this guy seems from his mugshot quite lucid, but what if he isn't? And what if the next such case was a 100 year old man with Alzheimers?

So to finish...let's get this right. It took the two sisters almost four decades to report the abuse, and in their own words 'track him down.'

Why did they track him down? Surely they could have left that to the police and reported the abuse much earlier?

I'm not happy with this one. Wonder how much money this chap has? Just a thought.

Even if he was guilty, what is achieved by sending him to prison at his age and in his condition. There are alternative penalties, e.g. house arrest.

I do believe there have been quite a number of people pleading guilty to crimes they did not commit, whether due to the psychological pressure put on them, or some other reason. I think there needs to be more solid evidence than somebody claiming something happened decades ago. Where are the safeguards against wrongful convictions?

It never ceases to amaze me that when a case like this makes the news, most here are always quick to imply that there's something dubious going on. Unless you've been affected by this kind of abuse you'll never know why some leave it many years before looking for closure. I'm guessing that they "tracked him down" because the Police simply weren't bothered. No surprise there either. Giving him the benefit of the doubt because of his age is outrageous.

I haven't taken either side. I look at all cases objectively, which is what I'd be expected to do if on a jury. I also value the old policy of innocent until proven guilty which was created to protect all of us and should be applied equally to all of us.

He might be guilty or he might not. I could never base such a decision merely on one person's word against another. There has to be more evidence in order to remove any reasonable doubt.

Actually, far too many assume guilt as the default, especially in this kind of case. If none of us asked questions then we need not bother with courts or trials; just give free hand to the lynch mobs.

Emma Bee wrote:
[quote]Even if he was guilty, what is achieved by sending him to prison at his age and in his condition. There are alternative penalties, e.g. house arrest.

What a ridiculous comment. Why dont we just let murderers off as well, just because something happened years ago does not mean it should go unpunished. Whether it be last week, last year or 40 years ago.
Should have put Fred West under house arrest too, could have visited the corpses under the floorboards when he got the urge, plus it would have kept his human rights intact.

I think we are allowed a fair degree of scepticism Angel given the very many cases of miscarriage of justice that have occured...as opposed to those that haven't yet been exposed or never will.


Although you have a point. Without knowing the facts it's difficult work this out but given his age I don't know what is served by him being in jail..enormous cost..perhaps he thought he'd be better cared for in there ?

Still..these women will be able to claim compensation now.

Here in Oz a whole raft of Catholic teachers have been charged over historic offences after one nutcase accused one of abuse and he (at 72) was banged up without bail for 2 weeks
until his lawyer conclusively proved that the priest was in Rome for 2 years at the time after having to trawl immigration records...something the police should have done.

Still-with the police placing adverts in a country town newspaper...low and behold..a dozen other lads came forward with claims and now 4 more are chraged..all over 60 and one at 79 in a nursing home for priests.

The same lawyer has already claimed that it's the worst case of 'pedo hysteria' and is outraged the police went on a 'trawling' case placing adverts in newspapers and reminding claimants about compensation (most UK forces are now forbidden to do so) and he is positive they will all be found innocent.

Some of these case are really too much.. a boy saying he was touched up in a tent 40 years ago on a camping trip...who does one prove it did or didn't happen ?

Even in Thailand they have a Stature of Limitations of 20 years on murder !!

Carl, you entirely missed my point.

People assume that the mark of a civilized society is how much it values the welfare of its young. They also assume that we are reaching the apex of civilisation here in the UK in the early 21st century. For example, turning the disappearance of Maddie into a new pagan cult, all in order to hide our guilt at the obvious truth that children these days are just noisy, cumbersome, fashion accessories that we can no longer be arsed taking proper care of (as the maddie case exemplifies).

Actually, the mark of a civilisation is how it looks after it's older people - that infertile, unproductive segmant of the population that simply drains our financial resources.

And by that measure, we're not doing very well. No civilisation in history has ever made hating older people (at least older men) into some kind of moral duty. Even the eskimos must despise our attitude to the old.

Guilty or not this is a sad result.

What comes next? Digging up the graves of those who have been accused after death,and putting their head on a pole?

This whole episode just shows how far gone we are along the road of tabloid inspired witch huntism.