A SEX attacker, brought to justice almost 20 years after he brutally tried to rape a terrified pensioner, has failed in a bid to have his jail term cut.

Ronald Steven Toms was jailed for 15 years in 2011 for the attempted rape of an 84-year-old widow in 1987.

The traumatised victim died in 1995, still fearing her attacker might return to prey on her again.

Toms, of Iscennan Road, Ammanford, was finally caught when he was arrested for a petty offence and his DNA matched to samples taken from the crime scene.

He launched a bid to challenge the length of his sentence at London's Criminal Appeal Court on Tuesday - but was told by top judges his case had “no merit”.

The court heard Toms admitted attempted rape and another serious sexual offence at Swansea Crown Court in May 2011 and was jailed the following month.

He tried to rape the victim, who he lived nearby at the time of the attack in 1987, during a late-night break in at her home.

She suffered injuries including two black eyes and bruising to her arms, where she had been held down, and spent two weeks in hospital.

The pensioner's son said she had never recovered from the ordeal and feared her attacker's return until the day she died.

A sample taken from the scene of the crime was not complete enough to produce a full DNA profile at the time, but advances in technology meant that became possible in 2004.

The profile, which was added to the national police database, was then discovered to be a match for Toms following his arrest for a public order offence in 2010.

When police turned up at his house to arrest him in March, he said: "I've been waiting for you to come for 20 years."

Toms launched a bid to challenge his sentence, arguing that he did not receive proper advice from his lawyers about an appeal at the time of his sentence.

But, rejecting his case, Judge David Radford said the long delay between his sentence and the lodging of his appeal was “in no way justified” by the reasons he gave.

Sitting with Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice Gilbart, he added: "It seems to us that the appellant had every opportunity to pursue matters sooner - with or without the assistance of his legal team."