A former Canterbury Christ Church University student who tried to snatch a schoolgirl off the street at gunpoint deserves nothing less than a life term, top judges have ruled.

George Richards – also known as Luke Sadowski – cooked up a bizarre and chilling plan to abduct a child.

The pervert had transformed his flat into a dungeon, ready to receive his victim.

His first attempt to snatch a 10-year-old girl off a footbridge on her way to school last September was thwarted by the vigilance of an off-duty police officer, London’s Appeal Court heard.

The officer spotted Richards as he took hold of the girl in Ware, Hertfordshire, and chased him from the scene.

The girl’s mum was only yards behind her daughter when the sick deviant struck, the court heard.

Undaunted, Richards set about acquiring weapons to help subdue his next victim, travelling to London where he bought an imitation pistol.

A few days after the first abduction bid, he struck again, plucking a five-year-old girl off her mother’s doorstep before fleeing when confronted by the angry mum.

Richards, of Gladstone Road, Ware, was cornered soon after by quick-witted police. Although he tried to ward them off with the replica gun, he was rapidly overpowered.

The 30-year pervert, originally from Canterbury, already had a conviction dating back 11 years for trying to “buy” a child over the internet for sex – a plot which was foiled by the FBI.

The former student at Canterbury Christ Church college was jailed for life at St Albans Crown Court in March this year.

He admitted two counts of child abduction, using an imitation firearm and possessing a knife.

Judge Michael Stokes QC told the Appeal Court that police who searched Richards’ home in Ware discovered that he had boarded up the front windows. However, his case reached court as his legal team challenged his life sentence with claims that it was too harsh.

Judge Stokes, sitting with Lord Justice Davis and Mr Justice King, said the facts of Richards’ crimes made for “disturbing and chilling” reading.

He had rightly been classified as an “extremely dangerous individual” from whom the public - and young girls in particular - needed protection.

And he concluded: “The quite dreadful and chilling circumstances of the case – and the facts of his convictions – plainly justified imposing a life sentence.”