Home   Thanet   News   Article

Pervert Peter Tyler sentenced to 14 years after being convicted of abusing two girls

By KentOnline reporter

Canterbury Crown Court

Canterbury Crown Court

A 54-year-old pervert has been handed a 14-year sentence after a “campaign of sex abuse” on vulnerable children.

Vile Peter Tyler tried to convince a jury that he couldn’t have carried out the attacks because he was gay.

And then the twisted twice-married dad-of-four went on to accuse his innocent victims as being “born liars and troublemakers”.

But a jury at Canterbury Crown Court rejected his account and convicted him on 10 sex allegations involving two children.

Now Tyler, of Millmead Road, Margate has been given an 11-year jail sentence and an additional three years on licence.

Judge Simon James told him: “The truth is you are a predatory paedophile with an apparent uncontrollable sexual interest in young girls.

“What you set about doing was premeditated and your motive was to groom (your victims) so they might engage in sexual activity with you.”

“This was a series of offending which involved the callous abuse of vulnerable victims" - Judge Simon James

Tyler had been warned off by police and social services because of his “persistence and obsession” with young girls – but he ignored them to corrupt one victim and then set about grooming another.

At court he tried to claim he was homosexual and had no interest in girls.

But he confessed that he carried out a sex act with himself after touching one of his female victims.

The judge added: “That seems to fly in the face of your claim to be exclusively homosexual and having no interest in females.”

After his convictions, Tyler then tried to con a probation officer claiming the attacks may have happened while he was drunk.

But Judge James told him: “I am not convinced that a protracted campaign of sexual offences of this gravity can possibly be explained away by drunkenness.

“My reading of the (probation) report sounds like a second attempt to deny responsibility – the jury having rejected your first attempt.

“This was a series of offending which involved the callous abuse of vulnerable victims. Although you did not use physical force, the fact is however you were sufficiently deviant and calculated that you had no need to use force.”

Close This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.Learn More