The defendant, who had kissed a 20-year-old man with learning difficulties without consent, did not pose a significant risk of serious harm; therefore a term of imprisonment for public protection was inappropriate.
The defendant, who had kissed a 20-year-old man with learning difficulties without consent, did not pose a significant risk of serious harm; therefore a term of imprisonment for public protection was inappropriate.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.229(2) EXISTENCE OF SIGNIFICANT RISK OF SERIOUS HARM IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION KISSING VULNERABLE YOUTH WITHOUT CONSENT s.224(3) s.229(3) SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT VULNERABLE ADULTS
A sentence of imprisonment for public protection was inappropriate where there was evidence to suggest that a defendant’s repressed paedophilic tendencies could be controlled and minimised with effective treatment.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.225 DANGEROUSNESS DEFENDANT FORMING SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH 13-YEAR-OLD GIRL IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION MEETING CHILDREN FOLLOWING SEXUAL GROOMING MITIGATION REASONABLENESS OF SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS
A judge had correctly imposed a sentence of imprisonment for public protection upon an offender who had committed a series of sexual assaults against several girls under the age of 13. However, given the non-penetrative nature of the offences, a minimum term of six years was too long and was replaced with a minimum of four years.
ASSESSMENT OF APPROPRIATE MINIMUM TERM CHILDREN CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 EXPOSURE IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION MINIMUM TERM MULTIPLE OFFENDING POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.82A s.104 s.7(1) SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT SEXUAL ASSAULT UPON CHILDREN UNDER 13 YEARS SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.66
A sentence of imprisonment for public protection, with a minimum term of 5 years and 211 days, was appropriate in the case of the appellant, who had pleaded guilty to the rape of a child, attempted rape, having a firearm with intent to commit an indictable offence, kidnapping, trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence and the sexual assault of a child.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION MINIMUM TERM OFFENDER TARGETING YOUNG GIRLS SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING
A minimum term of three years’ imprisonment for public protection imposed on an offender who had pleaded guilty to 17 counts comprising offences of indecent assault together with the taking and making of indecent photographs of children was not manifestly excessive where the offences had involved the planned, premeditated targeting of young children and a grave breach of trust over a prolonged period.
ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 Sch.37 DELIBERATE BEFRIENDING OF PARENTS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN OFFENCES AGAINST CHILDREN PREMEDITATED TARGETING OF CHILDREN Sch.15 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ASSAULT
A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of two years and six months was appropriate in the case of a 23-year-old man who had pleaded guilty to two offences of raping a child under the age of 13, one offence of meeting a child following sexual grooming, one offence of sexual activity with a child, and 10 offences of making an indecent photograph of a child.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.229 DANGEROUS OFFENDERS EXTENDED SENTENCES IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION RISK OF REOFFENDING Sch.15 SENTENCING UNDUE LENIENCY YOUNG GIRLS GROOMED FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
A judge had been wrong to undertake a trial of an issue concerning a defendant’s alleged conduct prior to an offence that had neither been admitted nor proved by verdict and further erred in using his findings against that defendant to form the basis of an assessment of dangerousness under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. However, in the circumstances, the judge was correct to impose imprisonment for public protection.
ASSESSMENT OF DANGEROUSNESS CHILD ABDUCTION CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1991 s.2 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.229 CRIMINAL LAW DANGEROUSNESS GUILTY PLEAS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION LEGISLATIVE INTENTION Part 2 PSYCHIATRIC EVIDENCE RESTRICTIONS RISK OF REOFFENDING s.224(3) s.225 s.225(2) s.225(3) s.229(2) s.229(2)(b) s.229(2)(c) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING WITHOUT PRIOR JUDGMENT SEXUAL ASSAULT TRIAL OF ISSUE CONCERNING PREVIOUS ALLEGATIONS TRIAL WITHOUT JURY TRIALS OF ISSUE
A judge was wrong to assess a defendant as posing a significant risk of causing serious harm to the public where the evidence did not support the requirement that the harm would result in death or serious personal injury.
IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION MITIGATION PUBLIC PROTECTION RISK OF REOFFENDING RISK OF SERIOUS HARM TO PUBLIC S.224 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.225 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT
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.