A Buddhist monk with links to Lincolnshire and Newark has been jailed for two years for indecently assaulting two girls after winning the trust of their families.
He appealed and the sentence was reduced so that both jail terms would run concurrently – to be served at the same time – making Takeuchi eligible to be considered for parole next month. The site is a popular tourist attraction, drawing thousands of visitors a year, including coach loads of school children.
He said that Takeuchi had travelled around the country, teaching meditation and staying with families. One, from Brighton, spoke about carrying her burden alone. She said: “At the time, I had no one to talk to. In the 70s it was a closed subject and I couldn’t talk to my friends. After seeing Takeuchi’s picture in press coverage of his previous case, the woman found the courage to contact Sussex Police.
“I wanted to see you today and I wanted to look you in the eye. I know what you did and I know what type of person you are.“I cannot forgive that you are claiming to be a Buddhist monk when you are against everything Buddhism stands for. “In fact, that façade of ‘Buddha’ that he strategically presented to the world was what enabled him to be left alone with me when I was 12.
“Moreover, since he had groomed my parents so successfully, I had been led by them to understand that it was a privilege to be in his presence – that it was a privilege to have him come to our house.” “Over the years, I have spent time wrestling with the pain of not feeling adequately empowered to formally report what happened to me.
“I had never felt able to report the incident officially for fear of being dismissed as a trouble-maker or attention-seeker. Takeuchi’s barrister Kate Chidgey said, in mitigation that Takeuchi had pleaded guilty early in the proceedings and was entitled to a shorter sentence as a result. “Those families looked to you for spiritual guidance and you repaid them by carrying out the horrific abuse of young girls.”
He was jailed for 10 months for the later offence, to be served consecutively, making 24 months in total.
What's the point of this utterly naive article?