A total extended sentence of seven years and six months’ imprisonment for historic offences of attempted buggery, indecency with a child and indecent assault on a man committed by an individual aged 20-25 against his neighbour aged 10-14, whilst lenient, was not unduly so. Although aspects of the judge’s reasoning had been flawed, the offences had very unpleasant features and there had been an element of grooming, no violence had been used.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION ATTEMPTS BUGGERY CRIMINAL LAW HISTORICAL OFFENCES MAXIMUM SENTENCES RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES STARTING POINT TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY
A 16-year extended sentence for the rape of an ex-partner was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle where the judge had been entitled to conclude that the offender was dangerous and a post-sentence report documented no change in mentality. There could also be no proper complaint about a concurrent 12-year sentence imposed for a second count of rape against the same victim.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES RAPE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES
Given the aggravating factors involved in the sexual assault and subsequent rape of the same victim, a judge had been entitled to set the minimum term of a life sentence at over twice the upper limit of the respective sentencing guideline range. However, the sentence was too high and was reduced from nine-and-a-half to eight-and-a-half years.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES DANGEROUSNESS LIFE IMPRISONMENT MENTAL DISORDER MINIMUM TERM RAPE SENTENCING
A sentence of six years’ imprisonment following convictions for historic charges of rape, indecency with a child and sexual assault, committed against a 13-year-old girl, was increased to 12 years’ imprisonment where the judge had departed from the sentencing guidelines without giving reasons for doing so and where the sentence imposed failed to reflect the totality of the offending.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES AGGRAVATING FEATURES INDECENCY INDECENT ASSAULT OFFENCES AGAINST CHILDREN RAPE REASONS SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES STARTING POINT TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY
A sentence of nine years’ imprisonment, following convictions for three historic offences of sexual assault against a child, was increased to 14 years’ where the offending had been frequent and repeated and where the judge had wrongly constrained himself by the maximum sentence available for a single offence.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST AGGRAVATING FEATURES CHILD SEX OFFENCES INDECENT ASSAULT JUDGE WRONGLY RESTRICTING SENTENCE FOR REPEATED HISTORIC OFFENCES TO MAXIMUM FOR SINGLE OFFENCE SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 UNDUE LENIENCY
A sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment, imposed following convictions for four offences of rape and two offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, was increased to 16 years’ imprisonment with an extended licence period of five years, where the offender was dangerous and had committed the offences while serving a community sentence for a previous sexual offence.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST ACTUAL BODILY HARM AGGRAVATING FEATURES DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES RAPE SENTENCING UNDUE LENIENCY
A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a notional determinate sentence of 16 years’ imprisonment for rape, sexual assault and robbery, reduced to 12 years’ after credit for a guilty plea, was not manifestly excessive. The notional determinate sentence had been made to reflect all three offences, and there were significant aggravating factors which justified the high starting point.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION MINIMUM TERM RAPE ROBBERY SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT
A sentence of 17 years and 2 months’ imprisonment with an eight-year extension period imposed for child sex offences was justified as the offender had carried out the systemic and sustained abuse of his step-daughter from age 6 to 11 and of her cousin, who suffered from autism, at age 12.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CAUSING CHILDREN TO WATCH SEXUAL ACTS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENCES CHILD SEX OFFENCES EXTENDED SENTENCES POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED IMAGES OF CHILDREN RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 STARTING POINT STEPFATHER ABUSING CHILDREN UNDER 12 OVER NUMBER OF YEARS
Sentences of nine years’ imprisonment were neither unduly lenient nor manifestly excessive for two offenders who had raped an intoxicated young woman in an alleyway outside a nightclub. It had been appropriate not to impose a consecutive sentence for digital anal penetration by one of the offenders.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES ASSAULT BY PENETRATION CONCURRENT SENTENCES RAPE RAPE OF INTOXICATED YOUNG WOMAN OUTSIDE NIGHTCLUB SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING UNDUE LENIENCY
A total sentence of 22 years’ imprisonment imposed on a hospital doctor for sexual offences against children was not excessive in view of the egregious breach of trust involved. A finding of dangerousness was also justified, notwithstanding that the offences had not involved penetrative sexual activity, because of the far-reaching consequences of the offending and the very significant risk of serious harm posed by the offender.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST AGGRAVATING FEATURES APPROPRIATENESS OF DANGEROUSNESS FINDING CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES DANGEROUSNESS DOCTORS SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING TOTALITY OF SENTENCE WHETHER 22-YEAR CUSTODIAL SENTENCE AGAINST HOSPITAL DOCTOR FOR OFFENCES FALLING SHORT OF PENETRATIVE SEX EXCESSIVE
Please use the form below to make contact. Your email will be responded to promptly (we endeavour to respond to all email enquiries within one hour). Alternatively, you can call Stephen's firm, Twelve Tabulae Limited, on +44 (0) 203 846 5801.