BRIDGWATER man Andrew Margetts has been jailed for 25 years after being found guilty of 23 counts of sexual abuse against children following a court case that was described as a 'modern-day horror story'.

Andrew Margetts, 31, of Friarn Avenue, Bridgwater has been sentenced to a total of 25 years in prison with 12 months extended licence at Taunton Crown Court this afternoon (Monday, January 16).

He was accused of starting the attacks on a toddler when he was as young as seven and continuing offending against another younger girl and boy over a ten to 15 year period.

He stood trial accused of 23 charges, seven counts of rape, seven of indecent assault, three counts of false imprisonment, two of indecent assault, two counts of gross indecency, one sexual assault and one of engaging a child in sexual activity.

He denied all the charges.

On Friday, the jury heard the closing statements from Sean Brunton for the prosecution and Emma Martin for the defence.

"It has taken great courage for these three witnesses to come and give evidence here in court in front of the defendant," Mr Brunton said.

"The jury has heard Margetts comes from a chaotic and dysfunctional family background with his mother suffering from mental illness.

"He was bullied at school and became increasingly isolated, becoming overweight and more and more confined to his squalid bedroom where there was just a mattress for a bed, with rotting food and bottles of urine stacked along the walls," Mr Brunton said.

"It was a twilight, grotesque half-life, a modern day Bridgwater horror story quite frankly.

"It is something you think you would only read about in the Daily Mail or at the beginning of a crime television programme.

"But it was bleak, tragic and all too real. Sadly it was real for the three victims as well."

Mr Brunton said Margetts persistently refuted the claims against him but had been at a loss to explain Facebook messages to the alleged victims almost a decade after the attacks were said to have taken place.

Defending, Emma Martin emphasised the jury had to strive to uphold the burden of proof in court.

"It is not for him to prove that these are false allegations, it up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these offences took place."

Mrs Martin said there were a number of details and inconsistencies in the case which the jury should examine carefully before arriving at their decision.