Glasgow paedophile has more than 2 years added to his sentence

Appeal judges have quashed an 'unduly lenient' 45 month jail sentence given to a paedophile who filmed himself raping a three year old boy.

Chris Hume,29, videoed the sickening sexual assault on the child, who cannot be named for legal reasons, using his mobile phone at a house in Glasgow on October 11 2016.

The pervert was jailed at the city's high court in July 2017 after pleading guilty to charges of rape and making a video recording of the sexual assault.

Judge Lady Scott handed Hume a prison term of almost four years. She said she found the sentencing of Hume to be 'particularly difficult'.

In a written judgement issued at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, judges Lady Dorrian, Lord Brodie and Lord Turnbull decided to impose a six year sentence on Hume.

In the judgement, Lord Brodie wrote that Lady Scott should have imposed a lengthier sentence on Hume.

He wrote that Lady Scott should have followed sentencing in similar cases when she was considering how to dispose of the case.

He wrote: 'The respondent pleaded guilty to two very serious offences. Other than the fact that he had no previous convictions, there is little if anything by way of mitigation in the respondent's personal circumstances or his response to his offending as recorded in the background reports.

'Looking to the cumulative effect of these various factors we have concluded that the headline sentence selected by the sentencing judge was not only a lenient one but an unduly lenient one.

'In concluding that it was unduly lenient we have been practically influenced by the fact that the respondent recorded a moving image of his rape of the complainer.

'That this was to be regarded as a material aggravation (and therefore a factor pointing to a higher sentence than would have otherwise have been imposed simply for the rape) was enunciated in Attorney General's Reference and reiterated in the subsequently published definitive guideline.

'That is a position we would endorse. We do not see it to be reflected in the sentencing judge's disposal."

During proceedings earlier this year, the court head how the boy's father left the flat at about 2pm to pick up his wife and asked Hume to babysit.

Prosecutor Angela Gray said: 'The accused took the opportunity to rape the boy and whilst doing so filmed the act using his mobile telephone.'

When the parents returned home, Hume was sitting on the couch and the boy was in his bedroom.

The child then entered the living room and accused Hume of sexually abusing him.

At this point, the court heard how Hume became irate and started to wave his arms and told the boy: 'Mate, you were the one that was being bad and pulling down your trousers.'

He added: 'I am no having this" and swore at the boy.

Hume then ran away leaving behind his two mobile phones and his jacket. The family contacted the police and Police Scotland's cybercrime unit managed to extract footage from Hume's phone.

Defence advocate Frances Connor told the court: 'My client is genuinely horrified by his actions that day.'

She told the court that her client was undergoing programmes to try to understand why he committed the offences.

Following the court case, prosecutors launched an appeal against Hume's sentence. Alex Prentice QC told the court that the sentence was unduly lenient as it failed to recognise the seriousness of Hume's offending.

Summarising the crown's argument, Lord Brodie wrote: 'It is submitted that the sentence failed to satisfy the need for retribution, deterrence and protection of the public.'

The appeal judges agreed with Mr Prentice's submissions.

Lord Brodie added: 'We shall quash the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge. We shall substitute a sentence of six years imprisonment.