Child rapist who terrorised a mother and son, wins appeal to have jail sentence reduced.

A convicted child rapist who pushed a mother and her son towards a cliff edge of Edinburgh’s Arthur’s Seat has had his sentence reduced by two years following an appeal.

Daniel Wilson was found guilty following trial of assaulting his then partner as she held her son – aged between two and four at the time – and repeatedly pushing her towards a cliff edge causing her to slip, holding them at the cliff edge and repeatedly threatening to push them off to the danger of their lives. The incident took place on an occasion between 1996 and 1998.

Wilson was also convicted of assaulting the boy by punching and slapping him and repeatedly striking him on the head and body to his injury, at addresses in Edinburgh on various occasions between 1994 and 1998.

He was acquitted of an allegation that he repeatedly sexually assaulted the little boy who was at the centre of Arthur’s Seat assault.

Wilson was sentenced to five years in prison at the High Court in Livingston in March 2020.

Daniel Wilson – Google Images

He is also currently serving a 15 year prison term for repeatedly raping a child under the age of 15 and downloading child pornography – this sentence was imposed for crimes he committed during a spell living in Wales. His name will remain on the Sex Offenders’ Register for life.

According to a written opinion of the court delivered by Lord Carloway, the Lord Justice General, in relation to an appeal from Wilson against his conviction and sentencing over the historical offences in Edinburgh, Wilson’s sentence should be shortened by three years.

The appeal judges, also including Lord Menzies and Lord Pentland recognised that these offences at the time were carried out when Wilson was in his early 20s and that he had a ‘limited record’

His report said: “In all the circumstances, the court considers that the sentence was excessive. It will substitute for the five year consecutive term, one of three years consecutive. To that extent the appeal against sentence is sustained.”

-->