A FOUR-YEAR sentence on disgraced hotelier Chris Sharp for his involvement in child pornography has raised some questions about adequate punishment for crimes most islanders believe to be off the scale of acceptability.

Reaction to the La Fregate director’s appearance in court last week has been very strong and is one of the most commented topics on this newspaper’s sister website.

Many do not regard the expected term – an assumed two years after remission – as sufficient and the role of the hotel in this has also been called into question.

Why wasn’t an individual facing serious criminal charges involving child security and/or exploitation suspended pending trial, given the families with youngsters who would be passing through the establishment?

While that might be an extreme reaction, especially since everyone is innocent until proven guilty, Sharp indicated last November that he would not contest the case. That should have meant something to his fellow directors.

The other aspect concerning islanders is the extent to which a man who had hidden level five images depicting barbarous mistreatment of children on his PC should continue to benefit from dividends or bonuses from his association with one of Guernsey’s top hotels.

The court has imposed what it regards an appropriate sentence and demands for any collateral action have no regard for Sharp’s family, who are the other innocent victims of this matter.

Nevertheless, there is a serious reputational risk for La Fregate and its staff if a man many would regard as a pervert is seen as maintaining a financially beneficial relationship with the hotel. There are calls for the St Peter Port establishment to be boycotted and this newspaper has already received contact from overseas guests who have stayed there with their children expressing concern about the handling of the matter.

Sharp will serve his time and, in due course, emerge to pick up what remains of his life.

Meanwhile, a well-respected island institution is facing a PR disaster because of the actions of one of its directors, who still apparently does not believe he has done anything wrong.

What happens next will indicate what business – as distinct from islanders – feels about child pornography on the premises.