The judge at the centre of a row for passing an "unduly lenient" sentence in the case of an Oxford man who raped a 10-year-old girl has refused to apologise.

Judge Julian Hall, appearing before MPs in the Houses of Parliament in London yesterday, simply directed them to his controversial judgment and said: "I don't want to add anything to what I said in court.

"I spent about 10 minutes saying it. It's all there on the transcript."

Last week, he sentenced Keith Fenn, a window cleaner from Starwort Place, Blackbird Leys, to concurrent two-year and 18-month sentences for the rape in Henley last year, but called it an "exceptional" case because of the girl's perceived maturity.

Judge Hall, the Recorder of Oxford, could have jailed paedophile Fenn, 25, for at least five years. But it transpired Fenn could be free in as little as four months, having already spent eight months in custody on remand.

The case has now been referred to the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, the chief legal adviser to the Government, after the Crown Prosecution Service, which brought the case against Fenn, said it thought Judge Hall's sentence was "too lenient".

Lord Goldsmith has the power to pass the case to the Appeal Court for review of the sentence.

Judge Hall's comments sparked anger among many Oxford Mail readers and Sara Payne, the mother of murdered schoolgirl Sarah Payne, who labelled him "dangerously out of touch".

But yesterday, he appeared before the House of Commons constitutional affairs select committee to give evidence for their inquiry into "effective sentencing".

He told MPs: "If I could just say about last Friday's case, I don't want to add anything to what I said in court, I spent about 10 minutes saying it. It's all there on the transcript.

"I know the papers have been sent to the attorney. He is considering a reference, that is the first stage. If it goes to the Court of Appeal then they will consider it and, if I am wrong, I will hope to bear it with good grace."

The judge, who insisted he had a copy of the latest sentencing guidelines on his bench when he passed the sentence, said his only "regret" was that he failed to give the Press an advance copy of his judgment.

He said: "I have this regret in retrospect, without referring to what I did in the particular case, I think the ultra-careful judge would have typed up their judgement and handed it to the Press on the day or before the day.

"I recognise the fault in myself for not providing that in advance."

Judge Hall, when asked by the Oxford Mail whether he had any regrets about the sentence ahead of yesterday's hearing, said: "I'm not going to be answering any questions."