Convicted paedophile John Malcolm White is appealing his conviction and 25-year-sentence on charges of sexually abusing young boys.

White, a former Policeman, was sentenced a year ago for 11 sexual offences against three boys ? between the ages of ten and 12 ? between 1996 and 2001.

White?s overseas counsel, John Perry QC yesterday argued that the trial Judge?s summary in court was ?sarcastic? and unbalanced.

A 23-minute recording of then-Assistant Justice Carlisle Greaves? summary was played in court.

Mr. Justice Greaves described White as a ?monstrous man? and a ?sexual predator, guilty of these charges? in his summary.

He also described the act of buggery twice ? in detail ? with words Mr. Perry said were not heard in a civilised court from a veteran judge. Mr. Perry said Mr. Justice Greaves had shown obvious favour for the prosecution.

He said a trial judge is supposed to remain impartial and not voice his own opinion to the jury ? which minutes later was to deliberate on White?s fate.

However, Court of Appeal judge Justice Sir Charles Mantell noted that Mr. Justice Greaves was quoting the prosecution when he said ?and then Salvation came, John White was charged?.

But Mr. Perry insisted that Mr. Justice Greaves? words were ?theatrical, even for a prosecution?s speech? and said the judge must hold the scales evenly, not inflame the jury with derogatory words.

?This is excessively colourful language for a judge to use,? Mr. Perry said.

Mr. Perry added that, in the trial, the prosecution said that gifts bought by White for the three boys were used as a ?lure? to reel the boys in and then sexually abuse them.

Some of these ?gifts? included trips to Disney World, New York, the World Cup in France, gold jewellery, a Sony Playstation and some gold fish.

However, Mr. Perry said White did not just buy gifts for the boys, but also for other members of their families as they were for special occasions like a birthday, or Christmas or to praise one of the young boys for doing well at school.

White also apparently helped one of the boy?s mother pay the rent ? twice.

They were, he said, an indication of ?good character? as was the fact that he had no previous conviction.

Mr. Perry argued that while the gifts were introduced in court as a sign of good character, the prosecution used them as a motive White used to lure the young boys in and pay them off.

Mr. Perry said this was repeated by Mr. Justice Greaves in his summary when he said that while the gifts were a sign of good character, the jury should remember that it was ?all a trick?.

Even though alibi did not make up a part of Mr. Perry?s original argument in court a year ago, he told the Court of Appeal that there was evidence that White had been at work when the sexual offences were alleged to have occurred.

He said Police officers who worked with White, and were on the list of prosecution witnesses, were never called to testify to this.

Mr. Perry said one allegation was that White had taken one of the complainants to a movie at 2.30 p.m. on a particular day, when in fact White signed the roster at work at 3.30 p.m. and worked until midnight.

On days when White was home, Mr. Perry said, the complainants stated no sexual assault took place on those days.

The appeal continues today.