Det Con Atkinson said: “Beneath his veneer of jovial respectability, Watson was a predatory paedophile whose vile conduct only came to light when the victims found the courage to disclose his offending to professionals, family and police.
“It is to Watson’s shame that having been confronted with his crimes he subjected his victims to a further two years of anguish as they waited to face him in court.
He falsely maintained his innocence despite all evidence to the contrary – but to no avail, as the jury saw through his lies."He was convicted by a jury. The justice system has worked.
So...why the suggestion from the cop that he shouldn't have availed himself of his right to a trial? That he has some sort of obligation to accept his guilt and not subject his accusers to the 'trauma' of a trial?
After all, juries can be funny creatures!