So in other words it sounds like the judge's ruling was proportionate in this case, given the constraints he was compelled to work with.
I think the judge endeavoured to give sentence that was fair within the restrictions he was working under, I did agree with his remarks while sentencing, that he was giving him credit for pleading guilty but noting that he did not do this at his first opportunity and aggravated the trauma to the victims by ckaiming that the accusations were spurious when he knew fine well that he was guilty as sin. And the mitigating factor that the poor lamb was having trouble sleeping - so he's slept ok for the last 40 years or so knowing he committed the offences, but is plagued with sleeplessness now he's been caught and convicted? Well, good! I hope the survivors are happy with the sentence but I wouldn't blame them if they weren't.