U.K. Judge Tells Teacher Sex-Offender Busted with Child Pornography: 'I Don't Criticize You for Being...Attracted to Children

Well this is abhorrent to say the least. A school teacher who escaped jail with a suspended sentence after owning up to possessing literally 4,500 pornographic images, some of children as young as two years old, was told by his presiding judge that she did not criticize him "for being a teacher who's attracted to children."

63-year old substitute teacher David Armstrong was reportedly caught after a colleague noticed files on Armstrong’s laptop with names such as “rape wife,” “nude model” and “gay alligator.” Disturbed by the obviously deviant behavior that was at play, the teaching assistant immediately reported Armstrong to the police.

But it gets worse.

After finding a shocking 4,500 indecent images and videos on two laptops and an external hard drive, police arrested Armstrong. What is perhaps most repugnant, is that more than 300 of the images were reportedly of the "worst kind," some involving children as young as two.

But despite the damning evidence, Armstrong was somehow allowed to walk free, after Judge Mary Jane Mowat reportedly told him, “I don't criticise you for being a teacher who's attracted to children."

“Many teachers are but they keep their urges under control both when it comes to children and when it comes to images of children," the judge reportedly told Armstrong.

As if she were condoning Armstrong's urges while commending other deviants who just haven't managed to get caught yet.

Needless to say child abuse advocates are reportedly enraged by the judge's wildly inappropriate comments -- comments that have been cited as an "insult" to child victims.

Teachers were also reportedly up-in-arms over the judges outrageous comments, saying the incident cast a shadow over the teaching profession while sending the wrong message to pedophiles. The Telegraph reports:

Peter Bradley, deputy director of the children’s charity Kidscape, said: “Children who have been sexually abused would be horrified to read this judges remarks.

“Schools are not places where those attracted to children can work – schools are there to provide learning in a safe environment where children know the people who look after them can be trusted and relied upon.

“This teacher should not have been in the profession and it is outrageous for the judge to say many teachers are sexually attracted to children.

“The message needs to be clear – if you are sexually attracted to children then you don't work with them.”

Christine Blower, General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: “Teachers are professionals whose interest is ensuring children and young people achieve their educational potential.

“To suggest their interest in pupils could understandably be anything else is totally unacceptable.”

Jayne Phillips, Senior Legal Advocate at the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, added: “It is a very worrying message to send out.

“The judge’s comments do not reflect our knowledge of the UK’s teaching staff – they would be appalled by the suggestion that they are in anyway attracted to children.”

According to Telegraph, Armstrong confessed to five charges of making pornographic photos of children between 2007 and 2010. Some, however, were reportedly not of real children but were instead Japanese animations of children engaged in sex scenes.

But even though Judge Mowat admitted that Armstrong's "was by any standards a substantial collection, with some 300 of the worst kind," she only handed the sexual deviant a 12-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.

It might not come as shock then, that this is not the first time Judge Mowat has caused controversy over sentencing sex-offenders:

In 2008, she allowed former headmaster Phillip Carmichael to walk free from court after accepting that medication for Parkinson’s disease had turned him into a paedophile.

Sentencing a bus driver to ten-months in jail in 2006 for abusing a 12-year-old girl, the judge acknowledged that she felt “obliged” to lock him up because of “current views about sentences”.

“I have a record of trying to suspend sentences in cases like this and them ending up in the Court of Appeal,” she told Robert Prout, following a public outcry over the brevity of prison sentences for sex offenders.

Perhaps it is the judge who should be the one on trial over perpetuating such gross injustices. Why no one has investigated her or taken action to suspend her from the bench is still unclear.

While no real justice has been served, at the very least Armstrong has now been placed on the registered sex offenders list for ten years and has reportedly been banned by the court from owning a computer or other device capable of connecting to the internet. In addition, Telegraph reports that the sex-offender was ordered to undergo psychiatric treatment for his attraction to children and will allegedly never be allowed to work with children again.

Disturbingly, Armstrong had reportedly worked at many schools and colleges during his career.