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 29-year extended sentence, which included a custodial term of 21 years, imposed on a young adult offender following a campaign of rape against victims aged between 13 and 16, was excessive. Insufficient weight had been given to the offender’s age, lack of maturity and unstable background. An extended sentence of 26 years, with an 18-year custodial term, was appropriate.
AGE EXTENDED SENTENCES MATURITY MITIGATION RAPE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES VICTIM IMPACT YOUNG OFFENDERS
A judge had had insufficient regard to totality when imposing consecutive extended sentences totalling 38 years on a prolific sex offender who had pleaded guilty to committing 137 offences over the course of 10 years. A large number of the offences involved the deliberate targeting of vulnerable children on the internet, persuading them to provide him with naked images of themselves and blackmailing them to provide increasingly graphic and humiliating images of them taking part in degrading acts. An extended sentence of 25 years’ custody, with an extension period of eight years, was substituted for the original sentence.
BLACKMAIL CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES EXTENDED SENTENCES FORCED LABOUR FRAUD BY FALSE REPRESENTATION INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN MALICIOUS COMMUNICATIONS POSSESSION OF PAEDOPHILE MANUALS PUBLISHING OBSCENE ARTICLES SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN TOTALITY OF SENTENCE VOYEURISM
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
A judge had not erred when sentencing an offender to life imprisonment, with a minimum term of 10 years, as a sentence of “last resort” for extreme child sex offences committed over a number of years against his own children. The sentence was also not unduly lenient, despite the minimum term not being increased when the offender was sentenced for further offences which involved the same children being offered to other men for sexual purposes.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE CONSPIRACY EXTENDED SENTENCES LIFE IMPRISONMENT RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILD FAMILY MEMBER SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN UNDUE LENIENCY VICTIM IMPACT
It was a technical error to impose a single global extension period when sentencing for two or more offences by means of consecutive extended sentences. Simplicity was achieved by imposing one single extended sentence on one of the offences, and setting its terms having regard to all the other features of the case.
CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES EXTENDED SENTENCES MEDICAL REPORTS PRE-SENTENCE REPORTS PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS ROBBERY SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT TOTALITY OF SENTENCE
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 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
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
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.