A custodial sentence of 9 years and 6 months and a further probation period of one year imposed on a 91-year-old former monk for historical offences of indecent assault, buggery and attempted buggery was unduly lenient, and was replaced with a custodial term of 12 years.
AGE BUGGERY CHILD SEX OFFENCES DELAY GUILTY PLEAS HISTORICAL OFFENCES INDECENT ASSAULT NORTHERN IRELAND PROBATION ORDERS REDUCTION OF SENTENCE SENTENCING UNDUE LENIENCY
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 total sentence of 16 years’ imprisonment was increased to 20 years where a judge had been wrongly advised that his sentencing powers in relation to offences of buggery committed when the offender was under 18 were limited to 12 months’ imprisonment.
BUGGERY CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT 1933 s.53 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1982 s.6 FAMILIAL CHILD SEX OFFENCES HISTORICAL OFFENCES s.53(2) s.7 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SENTENCING POWERS TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY VICTIM IMPACT
An appeal against a sexual offences prevention order was dismissed as the order had not been imposed based on the fact that a specific person had been sexually abused, but on the basis of an earlier conviction, and later behaviour which posed a risk to the public of serious sexual harm.
BUGGERY CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DISCHARGE PUBLIC PROTECTION s.104(1)(a) s.104(5) s.106(7) s.108(6) s.110 s.110(3) SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.108 SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS
New evidence as to a complainant’s reliability and truthfulness, which was not disclosed at the trial in 2001 of a man charged with indecently assaulting under-age children and attempted buggery of an under-age boy when he worked at children’s homes in the 1970s, would not have affected the safety of his convictions even if it had been admissible.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES BUGGERY CHILD SEX OFFENCES CHILDREN’S HOMES CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.114 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EFFECT ON SAFETY OF CONVICTIONS INDECENT ASSAULT NEW EVIDENCE AS TO COMPLAINANTS’ CREDIBILITY AND RELIABILITY PROSECUTION DISCLOSURE YOUTH JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1999 s.41
An offender’s convictions for historic offences of rape, buggery, attempted rape, indecent assault and murder were deemed safe, as the judge had given the jury adequate directions as to the dangers of delay and its effect on the evidence.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSION OF HISTORIC EVIDENCE ATTEMPTS BUGGERY CONFESSIONS CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DELAY EFFECT ON FAIRNESS OF TRIAL INDECENT ASSAULT JURY DIRECTIONS MURDER POLICE INTERVIEWS PREJUDICE RAPE SEXUAL OFFENCES SIGNIFICANT DELAY IN CHARGING OFFENDER
A judge had correctly directed a jury on the issue of doli incapax that they could look at the circumstances surrounding historic sex offences to assist them in their assessment of whether a 13-year-old boy had been aware that his acts were seriously wrong.
“HISTORIC” OFFENCES BUGGERY CRIMINAL JUSTICE (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 1998 art.3 CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DOLI INCAPAX GROSS INDECENCY HISTORIC SEX OFFENCES INDECENT ASSAULT JURY DIRECTIONS NORTHERN IRELAND SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES AS EVIDENCE OF OFFENDER’S GUILTY KNOWLEDGE
A sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a 63-year-old man who had been convicted of numerous sexual offences against three teenage boys.
BUGGERY CHILD SEX OFFENCES CHILDREN GROSS INDECENCY INDECENT ASSAULT SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ABUSE OF THREE TEENAGE BOYS OVER PROLONGED PERIOD
Although cross-examination which had invited impermissible speculation by the defendant should not have been allowed, that was insufficient to support a conclusion that his conviction for rape, buggery and indecent assault was unsafe, there being no other basis on which to undermine the jury’s acceptance of the significant DNA evidence.
ADMISSIBILITY APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION FOR HISTORIC SEXUAL ASSAULT BASED ON DNA EVIDENCE BUGGERY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DNA EVIDENCE EFFECT ON SAFETY OF CONVICTION OF CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DEFENDANT INVITING IMPERMISSIBLE SPECULATION INDECENT ASSAULT RAPE s.14(1) SEXUAL OFFENCES SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 s.12(1) SUMMING UP
Deficiencies in a judge’s summing up were such as to render a conviction for historic child sex offences unsafe.
BUGGERY CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DELAY EFFECT OF DEFICIENCIES IN SUMMING UP ON SAFETY OF CONVICTION FOR HISTORIC CHILD SEX OFFENCES GOOD CHARACTER INDECENCY JURY DIRECTIONS LUCAS DIRECTIONS SUMMING UP