A grandfather’s convictions for the sexual abuse of his granddaughter were upheld. There was no proper basis for rejecting the granddaughter’s original complaints, which had been detailed in her ABE interview and maintained throughout the trial, and the reliability of a retraction statement she made shortly after sentencing had to be rejected.
APPEALS AGAINST CONVICTION ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FALSE STATEMENTS FRESH EVIDENCE RETRACTION SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILD FAMILY MEMBER
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 suspended sentence of two years’ imprisonment was increased by lifting the suspended element and imposing an immediate two-year custodial sentence, for an offender who had pleaded guilty to ten counts of historic sexual abuse. The court noted that this was an exceptional case, in which the offender had volunteered the fact of a second victim, and said it should not be treated as a precedent.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES APPROPRIATENESS OF SUSPENDED SENTENCE ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION INDECENT ASSAULT s.14(1) s.6 SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.7 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 SUSPENDED SENTENCES UNDUE LENIENCY
A total sentence of four-and-a-half years’ imprisonment imposed on an offender following his conviction for a number of sexual offences committed against his stepdaughter over a five-year period was unduly lenient. The sentence was increased to seven years’ imprisonment.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION INDECENT ASSAULT SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.14 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.9 TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY
A discretionary life sentence imposed under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 for assault on a child under 13 by penetration was not excessive. The offender was a predatory paedophile with previous convictions for sexual offences against children and the offence was of sufficient seriousness to warrant life imprisonment.
ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION CHILD SEX OFFENCES DANGEROUS OFFENDERS DISCRETIONARY LIFE IMPRISONMENT DISCRETIONARY LIFE SENTENCE OFFENCES OCCURRING IN 2004/2005 POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.76 s.82(2)(b) s.85 s.91 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENCE SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENCE AND DANGEROUSNESS OF OFFENDER SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13
Although imprisonment for public protection was a sentence of last resort, it was appropriate where there was nothing to say that the risk posed by a dangerous defendant would be significantly reduced by the time of the projected release date from a determinate or extended sentence.
ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 BY PENETRATION CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 DANGEROUSNESS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION NO EVIDENCE THAT RISK POSED BY OFFENDER WOULD BE REDUCED BY RELEASE DATE RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCING UNLAWFUL SENTENCES
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.