A three-year community order imposed on an offender for multiple offences of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity was replaced with a term of three years’ imprisonment. The manipulative nature, frequency and persistence of the offending, targeting vulnerable victims including two under 13, required an immediate custodial sentence even though the offender had voluntarily sought help for his behaviour.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY COMMUNITY ORDERS CUSTODIAL SENTENCES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN SENTENCING SEXUAL GROOMING UNDUE LENIENCY
Convictions for making indecent photographs of children were quashed where, although the defendant had not given evidence on the point, there was material which required the judge to give directions on the possibility that the defendant might have downloaded the images without knowing that they involved children. That was a potential defence and had to be left specifically for the jury to determine.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JURY DIRECTIONS KNOWLEDGE
A sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a senior police officer who had been convicted of a number of sexual offences against his wife and teenage boys. In a case of this nature, where the offending spanned a long period of time and where there had been significant changes in the legislation, Crown counsel should ensure that assistance was given to the judge in relation to his sentencing powers.
BARRISTERS’ POWERS AND DUTIES COUNSEL’S DUTY TO ASSIST JUDGE IN RELATION TO SENTENCING POWERS HEARINGS IN OPEN COURT INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN LIFE IMPRISONMENT RAPE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING POWERS SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT SEXUAL OFFENCES TAKING PLACE OVER LONG PERIOD OF TIME
The purpose of the legislation making it a crime punishable with imprisonment to have sexual relations with those under 16 years was to protect those under 16. A reduction of punishment on the basis that the victim encouraged the commission of the offence was wrong. The victim’s vulnerability was an aggravating rather than a mitigating feature.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES CHILDREN INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN UNDUE LENIENCY VICTIM ENCOURAGING OFFENCE AGGRAVATING NOT MITIGATING FEATURE
Sentences totalling 16 months’ imprisonment were unduly lenient, having been imposed following an offender’s guilty pleas to 15 counts of causing or inciting, or attempting to incite, children to engage in sexual activity where the offender had contacted up to 220 children via Facebook. A sentence of four years was appropriate.
CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN OFFENDER CONTACTING CHILDREN VIA FACEBOOK AND INCITING SEXUAL ACTS ON CAMERA s.101 s.81 SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003 s.8 SOCIAL MEDIA UNDUE LENIENCY
A district judge had not erred when refusing to make an anonymity order in respect of a defendant charged with making indecent images of children as, despite the defendant having been targeted and attacked in relation to a previous allegation of indecent assault of a child, he had not demonstrated that there was a real risk of his being attacked in relation to the instant offences.
ANONYMITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DEFENDANT CHARGED WITH MAKING INDECENT IMAGES OF CHILDREN EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.2 HEARINGS IN OPEN COURT HUMAN RIGHTS INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JUDICIAL REVIEW OF REFUSAL TO MAKE ANONYMITY ORDER MAGISTRATES’ COURTS NORTHERN IRELAND OPEN JUSTICE REPORTING RESTRICTIONS RIGHT TO LIFE RISK WHETHER REAL RISK OF ATTACK
A sexual offences prevention order was varied because its terms were wider than was necessary and duplicated the regime already in place under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
DISCLOSURE AND BARRING SERVICE INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN INTERNET NECESSITY OVERLAP WITH REGIME UNDER SAFEGUARDING VULNERABLE GROUPS ACT 2006 SAFEGUARDING VULNERABLE GROUPS ACT 2006 Sch.3 SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHETHER TERMS OF SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDER WERE WIDER THAN NECESSARY
In calculating the time to be served pursuant to an order under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.116, justice required account to be taken of time spent in prison between recall to custody to serve the balance of a licence period for a previous offence and sentencing for a new offence committed while on licence.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CREDIT FOR TIME SERVED EXTENDED SENTENCES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN OFFENDING ON LICENCE ORDER UNDER S.116 POWERS OF THE CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 PERIOD BETWEEN RECALL TO CUSTODY AND SENTENCING FOR NEW OFFENCE POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.116 RETURN TO CUSTODY s.116(1) s.116(2) s.116(2)(a) s.116(6)(b) s.85 s.85(1) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING POWERS
A sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment following guilty pleas to six counts of taking indecent photographs of a child contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 s.1 was not manifestly excessive. However, a deprivation order pursuant to the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.143 for forfeiture of his computer went too far and was quashed.
APPROPRIATENESS OF ORDER FOR FORFEITURE OF COMPUTER CRIMINAL LAW DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY USED FOR PURPOSES OF CRIME DEPRIVATION ORDERS INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS (SENTENCING) ACT 2000 s.143 PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ACT 1978 s.1 s.1(1)(a) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING
When sentencing an offender for making and distributing indecent images of children, a judge had been entitled to take a high starting point above the sentencing guidelines to reflect the scale, gravity and grotesqueness of the material before him. However, extended sentences relating to possession of such images had to be corrected as they exceeded the maximum sentences allowable.
CORRECTIONS TO POSSESSION SENTENCES WHERE ABOVE MAXIMUM SENTENCES ALLOWED CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1988 s.160 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND IMMIGRATION ACT 2008 s.63(7) DANGEROUSNESS EXTENDED SENTENCES GRAVITY AND SCALE OF MATERIAL HIGH STARTING POINT ABOVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES 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.