Where a person subject to a sexual offences prevention order had pleaded guilty to an indictment which mistakenly alleged that he had breached a sex offender order contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s.2(8), the Court of Appeal found the indictment defective and quashed the conviction. It declined to annul the conviction and […]
A sexual offences prevention order was quashed where its terms were impermissibly wide. Since breach of such an order was a criminal offence carrying a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment, it was essential that the order was clear on its face, capable of being complied with without unreasonable difficulty and/or the assistance of a […]
A sentence of nine months’ imprisonment suspended for two years with a two year residence requirement imposed on an offender following his pleas of guilty to four counts of sexual activity with a child family member was unduly lenient but was not altered as there were sufficient exceptional circumstances.
A disqualification from working with children was inappropriate where the offender posed a low risk of harm to young girls only and it was therefore replaced with a sexual offences prevention order reflecting this.
It was inappropriate to impose a sentence of imprisonment for public protection pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.225 on an offender convicted of making indecent photographs of children, because the link between the offending act of downloading images and the possible harm to children was too remote to satisfy the requirement that the […]
A finding that a defendant did not pose a risk of serious harm to the public within the meaning of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.229 did not preclude the court from imposing a sexual offences prevention order under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.104 on that defendant.
There might be occasions, in which a sexual offences prevention order under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.104 was made to protect a child of a defendant, where the family court’s jurisdiction should be reflected in the order because of the additional flexibility it provided. In the circumstances a s.104 order was varied to provide […]
