A HUDDERSFIELD dad is calling for a change in the law after discovering he lives next door to one of the country’s worst perverts.
Michael Raybould was sentenced last week after police discovered more than 300,000 pornographic images of children at his Kirkheaton home.
Next door neighbours Iain and Rachel James had no idea their two children lived so close to the sex offender.
“It’s been two years since he was charged but we knew nothing about it until we read about the trial in the Examiner a few weeks ago,” said Mr James.
Raybould, 58, was spared jail on Friday despite amassing a collection of 315,531 pornographic images of children.
He admitted at Leeds Crown Court that he had one of the largest ever collections of child pornography, including videos of girls with adults.
The James’ had no idea they and their children, aged eight and 12, were living next door to a man branded a “pathetic pervert” by a judge.
Now they want authorities to look at changing Sarah’s Law, which allows families to be given information about sex offenders.
Mr James, 43, said: “It’s worrying that the police didn’t call us and put us in the picture, given that we have a young family.
He added he and his wife had become more vigilant since reading about Raybould’s trial in the Examiner.
“We feel a little scared to let the children play out. We don’t want to supervise them all the time in their own garden but we feel like we have to.
“We’ve had to explain the situation to them, we’ve had to give them a lot more information than we would want to so as they know to stay away from him.”
Mr James fears his children’s friends may not come round to play any more.
“No-one has said anything, but there have been a couple of their friends who haven’t come round in the last few weeks,” he said.
“I understand it. We would do the same.”
He feels there may have to be changes to Sarah’s Law – which allows parents to check if people with access to their children have been convicted of sex offences.
He said: “I can understand the police’s point of view, that someone has rights until they’re convicted.
“I just feel in this case maybe they should have come round to put us in the picture so we could protect our children.
