A sentence of three-and-a-half years’ imprisonment imposed on an offender for historic offences of buggery and indecent assault on a fellow resident at a children’s home was unduly lenient. The offender satisfied the dangerousness criteria and a sentence of five years and ten months’ imprisonment with a three-year extension period was appropriate.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES HISTORICAL OFFENCES INDECENT ASSAULT RAPE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES 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 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
An extended sentence comprising a 12-year custodial term and a five-year extension period was appropriate in the case of an offender who had vaginally and anally raped a friend, handcuffing her and pressing a pillow over her face. A discretionary life sentence was not justified.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Pt 12 s.225 DANGEROUSNESS DISCRETIONARY LIFE IMPRISONMENT EXTENDED SENTENCES RAPE s.143 s.22 s.224A s.225 s.226A s.226A(8) s.240ZA s.263 SENTENCING
A sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment was appropriate for an offender who had pleaded guilty to making and possessing indecent photographs of children. An extended sentence was not justified as there was no evidence of dangerousness in relation to contact with children.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1988 s.160(1) DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ACT 1978 s.1(1)(a) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING
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
A sentencing judge had no jurisdiction to vary a sentence once the time period in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.155 had expired. The case of R. v Saville (Peter Davies) [1981] Q.B. 12 provided no authority to the contrary.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES DANGEROUSNESS EXPIRY OF 56-DAY TIME LIMIT UNDER S.155 POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 EXTENDED SENTENCES POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.155 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SENTENCING POWERS UNLAWFUL SENTENCES VARIATION OF SENTENCE
A sentence of four years’ imprisonment was appropriate for an offence of sexual assault where the offender had pretended to be a taxi-driver, targeting lone, drunken females, and where he had prevented his victim from leaving his car before taking her to a dark area to assault her in extremely frightening circumstances. As the force was minimal and there was no attempt to undress his victim or degrade her in any way, a sentence of six years’ imprisonment was too long.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 DANGEROUSNESS DRUNKEN FEMALES TARGETED BY PRETEND TAXI-DRIVER LONE MINIMAL FORCE AND NO UNDRESSING OR DEGRADATION INVOLVED SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT TAXIS TOTALITY OF SENTENCE VICTIM TAKEN TO DARK AREA AND PREVENTED FROM LEAVING VEHICLE
The imposition of a sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of four-and-a-half years following an offender’s conviction for rape and kidnapping could not be faulted, notwithstanding the judge’s failure to set out her reasons for rejecting an extended sentence in her sentencing remarks. An extended sentence had undoubtedly been discussed at the relevant time, and the offender, who posed a serious risk to vulnerable women, was unlikely to comply with the licence conditions under the extended sentence regime.
APPROPRIATENESS OF SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Pt 12 DANGEROUS OFFENDER POSING SERIOUS RISK TO VULNERABLE WOMEN DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION JUDGE FAILING TO SET OUT REASONS FOR REJECTING IMPOSITION OF EXTENDED SENTENCE IN SENTENCING REMARKS KIDNAPPING Pt 12 s.225 Pt 12 s.226 RAPE s.227 s.228 SENTENCING
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) 141 2800504.