VICTIMS of a paedophile priest were horrified after his sentence was slashed by top judges - despite his admitting a campaign of abuse of Catholic schoolboys spanning more than 30 years.
David Pearce, 68, abused the boys while teaching at St Benedict's School, in Eaton Rise, Ealing, between 1972 and 2007.
Last October, after admitting a string of indecent and sexual assaults against four under-14s and an older teenager, he was jailed at Isleworth Crown Court for eight years.
But on Friday, Pearce, of High Wycombe, and formerly of Ealing Abbey, in Charlbury Grove, had his sentence slashed to five years at the Court of Appeal.
A victim molested by the priest when he was nine said the ordeal destroyed his life and he ended up on the streets and later in prison.
The 27-year-old said: "It made me a very cold-hearted person, I'm emotionally dead and have no respect for authority. I can't believe they could even consider reducing his sentence. He had been doing it for three decades, that's the kind of person he is. He's not going to change."
The victim's mother said she was 'gobsmacked' at the decision.
She added: "You can't see the mental damage that has been done. It's ruined my and my son's life."
Sir Christopher Holland, sitting with Mr Justice David Clarke, said the offences themselves were 'moderate', but the abuse of trust was an aggravating feature.
The court heard how Pearce separated the boys from their peers and molested them.
In 2004, he was sued by one of his victims for damages and the abbey banned him from having contact with children.
Despite this, Pearce committed another sexual assault. Before his sentencing, 23 character references were submitted from shocked former pupils, who praised the priest's work at the school.
His barrister, Trevor Parry-Jones, pointed out other child abusers had committed far more serious offences, sometimes with previous convictions, and received similar sentences.
The two judges said: "The respective assaults for which the sentences were to be passed were moderate and, in the case of count 21, almost minimal. In our judgement the judge rather lost sight of the essential assaults."
