At the sentencing hearing, it emerged that Miller chillingly claimed he was “trying to think of a solution” of how to end the abduction before the child managed to alert police.

While an expert who wrote a report said they doubted Miller’s initial intention was to murder the girl, they said this could have become “a more likely occurrence” the longer the kidnap went on.

Before the abduction, Miller was an outspoken supporter of Nicola Sturgeon’s gender self-ID laws. Had they not been blocked by the UK Government, they would have allowed him to easily become legally female.

Opponents of the legislation said the case shattered SNP claims that self-ID would not pose a risk to females by making it easier for male predators to access women’s spaces.

Shona Robison, the deputy first minister who pushed the Bill through Holyrood, had sought to dismiss warnings about dangers of self-ID by claiming predatory men had “never had to pretend to be anything else” to harm women or girls.

‘Perverted fetishistic interests’

However, Lord Arthurson said that Miller, 53, had undertaken a “substantial component of planning” which included ensuring he presented as a female.

The child’s phone had run out of battery when Miller offered her a lift home in his Jaguar, but he instead locked her in his property. He sexually assaulted her while forcing her to dress in line with his “perverted fetishistic interests”.

He had initially claimed to police that he had behaved in a “motherly way” towards the child, which the judge branded “preposterous”. His denials meant the child had to go through intimate and traumatic physical examinations.

“The mode of abduction itself is also in my view a significantly aggravating feature, if any were needed in such a case,” the judge told Miller. “To speak plainly I am referring to your female presentation as you invited your victim into your car.

“One only has to ask oneself the simple question: would a [young] girl have willingly entered your car had you presented as a man? The answer is that obviously she would not.

“Your intentions were wicked and predatory, and clearly involved a substantial component of planning.”

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *