A DJ battered his wife on their wedding day during a string of violent attacks.

John Ormond, of Montrose, Angus, has been jailed for three years after repeatedly abusing his partner over a 37-year period.

A year before their wedding, Ormond, 67, broke his wife's arm after he chased her, pushed her down and repeatedly kicked her.

Despite the assault, she went through with the wedding in August 1980, only to be attacked when they returned home from their reception.

His wife, who Ormond was married to for 35 years, said she stuck by him because "we were married in a church and I stuck to the vows as much as I could until I couldn't take any more".

He then subjected her to years of torment and on one occasion, nine years into their marriage, left her with broken ribs after kicking her on Christmas day.

Former wedding DJ Ormond and his wife separated in 2005 before divorcing in 2015.

Fiscal depute Vicki Bell told the jury: "Crime has no sell by date in Scotland.

"These crimes date back to the 70s. We are dealing with a catalogue of prolonged abuse.

"Many of the charges followed a similar pattern - he would come home from the pub, be heard coming up stairs then crash, bang, wallop."

She added: "Look at how the attitudes in society have changed since the 70s.

"Back then it was a case of what happens behind closed doors stays behind closed doors.

"Back then, the police said he was the owner of the house and had nowhere to go so she had to let him back in."

Ormond denied 15 charges of assault on Linda and a child.

A jury took just two hours to find him guilty of 12 out of 15 charges of assault with the remaining three not proven.

Sheriff Tom Hughes also imposed a one-year supervised release order to monitor when he is freed.

He said: "You were convicted of some quite appalling conduct.

"It is clear you have caused catastrophic consequences to your victims.

"You don't accept in any way that you were involved in the matter and that you have no remorse.

"You say they are vindictive and making this up.

"That's not the view of the jury who accepted their evidence."