Burglars stole our precious memento

Swindon Advertiser: Anne and Peter Sinfield, from Brandenstoke, whose home was broken into. Anne is holding her empty jewellery box and Peter a picture of their daughter Karen, who died of cancer aged eight Anne and Peter Sinfield, from Brandenstoke, whose home was broken into. Anne is holding her empty jewellery box and Peter a picture of their daughter Karen, who died of cancer aged eight

DEVASTATED parents Paul and Anne Sinfield are appealing for the return of cherished keepsakes of their daughter after burglars stole them in a raid on their home.

The couple, who live in a mobile home on the Church Park Estate in Bradenstoke, near Royal Wootton Bassett, returned home on Tuesday after a holiday in Hertfordshire to find their bedroom window open and muddy footprints on their bed.

The raiders had broken a latch on a rear window to get in.

The couple were horrified to find they had taken their daughter Karen’s hospital ID tag and butterfly necklace.

Karen, who would have been 40 this year, died when she was eight after a cancer tumour was discovered in her spleen.

Mrs Sinfield said: “We used to call her the family peacemaker because she never argued or quarelled with anyone.

“She always used to calm things down and she was so brave when she was ill. Her things were in a little pink drawstring bag. I know it sounds silly, but her things were more important to me than anything.

“Its little things like that, that you can’t bring back.”

Mrs Sinfield, 63, and Mr Sinfield, 67, moved to Bradenstoke a year ago from a village near Swansea.

The pair used to work for social services.

The burglars took at least 24 brooches from Mrs Sinfield’s collection, as well as cufflinks, pearls and earrings.

They also took a gold watch engraved with the name of Mr Sinfield’s brother Fred, who died two years ago after suffering from breast cancer.

Mrs Sinfield said: “They had taken a pillowcase off the bed, obviously they had thrown things in.

“They hadn’t looked to see what they had taken, they had just taken everything.

“I don’t feel angry, I just feel sick. Why don’t they just respect people’s homes and belongings? What gives them the right to take things at random?

“I just hope that someone will find my little bits and pieces.”

Police are appealing for witnesses to call them on 101.

Comments (3)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:05am Thu 20 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

An appalling and very sad situation for the unfortunate victims of this crime. However, it does go to show the outcome of the judiciary refusing to jail our worse offenders.

If the criminals in this case are arrested, you can bet your last pound that they'll have a previous record of similar crimes and, all too predictably, a record of being let off and handed non-sentences by our local courts.

Hence their latest crime.

People are rightly outraged by crimes such as this, and yet we allow the judiciary to continue ensuring that they will happen on a regular basis. It's our fault, ultimately.
An appalling and very sad situation for the unfortunate victims of this crime. However, it does go to show the outcome of the judiciary refusing to jail our worse offenders. If the criminals in this case are arrested, you can bet your last pound that they'll have a previous record of similar crimes and, all too predictably, a record of being let off and handed non-sentences by our local courts. Hence their latest crime. People are rightly outraged by crimes such as this, and yet we allow the judiciary to continue ensuring that they will happen on a regular basis. It's our fault, ultimately. ChannelX

2:05pm Thu 20 Feb 14

BigBarry says...

ChannelX wrote:
An appalling and very sad situation for the unfortunate victims of this crime. However, it does go to show the outcome of the judiciary refusing to jail our worse offenders.

If the criminals in this case are arrested, you can bet your last pound that they'll have a previous record of similar crimes and, all too predictably, a record of being let off and handed non-sentences by our local courts.

Hence their latest crime.

People are rightly outraged by crimes such as this, and yet we allow the judiciary to continue ensuring that they will happen on a regular basis. It's our fault, ultimately.
Get a job or at least try and get out more.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: An appalling and very sad situation for the unfortunate victims of this crime. However, it does go to show the outcome of the judiciary refusing to jail our worse offenders. If the criminals in this case are arrested, you can bet your last pound that they'll have a previous record of similar crimes and, all too predictably, a record of being let off and handed non-sentences by our local courts. Hence their latest crime. People are rightly outraged by crimes such as this, and yet we allow the judiciary to continue ensuring that they will happen on a regular basis. It's our fault, ultimately.[/p][/quote]Get a job or at least try and get out more. BigBarry

5:15pm Thu 20 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

Another 'interesting' example of sentencing in Swindon:


A MAN who molested a five-year-old girl when he was drunk after a Christmas party has been jailed for two and a half years.

Reid, formerly of Haydon Wick, pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a child under 13.


is.gd/xObxoY

The maximum sentence available to the judge under current Sentencing Guidelines:

Sexual assault of child under 13
Sexual Offences Act 2003 s. 7
14 YEARS

14 years reduced all the way down to a derisory 2.5 years. Incredible.

With any luck the family will take this further as the Attorney General can review very low sentences given by the Crown Court in England and Wales if he’s asked to for some child sex crimes.
Another 'interesting' example of sentencing in Swindon: [quote] A MAN who molested a five-year-old girl when he was drunk after a Christmas party has been jailed for two and a half years. Reid, formerly of Haydon Wick, pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a child under 13. [quote] is.gd/xObxoY The maximum sentence available to the judge under current Sentencing Guidelines: Sexual assault of child under 13 Sexual Offences Act 2003 s. 7 14 YEARS 14 years reduced all the way down to a derisory 2.5 years. Incredible. With any luck the family will take this further as the Attorney General can review very low sentences given by the Crown Court in England and Wales if he’s asked to for some child sex crimes. ChannelX

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree