Jailed: Disabled Shropshire man gets seven years for raping another man

Mark Henson, 43, who entered the dock at Mold Crown Court with the aid of crutches, was ordered to register with the police as a sex offender for life yesterday.

A life-time restraining order was also made under which he must never approach the victim.

Henson, of Brookfield Estate, Weston Rhyn, near Oswestry, had denied two charges of rape upon the same complainant, described as a vulnerable man.

But he was convicted at an earlier trial by a jury, sitting at Chester Crown Court.

Sentencing him, Judge Geraint Walters said the starting point for such a case after trial was eight years with a range of between seven and nine years.

But he said he could not ignore important factors in the case including the defendant's own debilitating physical condition which would make any prison sentence all the more hard for him to serve.

The jury had accepted that he carried out two acts and the victim had asked him to stop.

But the defendant continued and it had been violating and humiliating in the absence of consent, the court was told.

The judge said that it was something the complainant was still trying to come to terms with.

"That is the wickedness of what you did," he said.

Henson was sentenced as a man of good character and the judge said it was a "great shame" that he had not admitted the offences. He could now have no credit in sentence after running a trial.

The defendant suffered ill-health, mostly used crutches or a zimmer to get around, and the judge said he took into account that his physical health meant that a prison sentence would be much tougher than for others.

"You will need care, day in day out, in custody in a way many others do not," he said.

That was being taken into account in the level of sentence, he added.

Judge Walters said that he wanted to reassure the defendant that there were institutions within the prison service that were tailored in order to provide for his care needs.

Prosecuting barrister Simon Rogers handed in a victim impact statement showing the effect the offences had on the complainant.

He said a restraining order was requested so that the defendant could not contact him directly or indirectly by any means whatsoever.

Defending barrister Brett Williamson said the testimonials showed that the defendant was normally caring and trustworthy and that he was fondly thought of by those around him.

He had a significant medical history and he feared that he would not be satisfactorily cared for in prison.

Mr Williamson said that he had reassured his client that the prison authorities had a statutory responsibility to provide him with reasonable care.

The defendant would clearly not find prison easy because of his genuine physical conditions, he said.