Top Rape Barrister and Leading Criminal KC
Call now: +44 (0) 141 2800504
≡
  • Home
  • Expertise
    • Rape Defence Barrister
    • Sexual Assault
      • Assault By Penetration Defence Barrister
      • Assault By Touching Defence Barrister
      • Administering Substances Defence Barrister
    • Underage sex
      • Grooming
    • Exploitation
    • Porn / Voyeurism
  • Criminal Appeals
  • Bail
  • Direct Access
  • Contact
  •  Call +44 (0) 141 2800504
Top Criminal Barrister QC and Leading Rape Defence Counsel

POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES

February 26, 2019

The terms of a sexual offences prevention order imposed on an offender who had been sentenced for voyeurism, which included an almost blanket ban on using the internet, were changed where its terms did not conform to the guidance given in R. v Smith (Steven) [2011] EWCA Crim 1772 with the result that it was unworkable and disproportionate.

APPEALS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN LISTING POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES PROPORTIONALITY SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS VOYEURISM

February 21, 2019

The court upheld a sexual harm prevention order, imposed for an indefinite duration, where an offender had received concurrent suspended prison sentences of 18 months after pleading guilty to three offences of possession of indecent photographs of a child and one offence of possessing an extreme pornographic image. Although the order had been imposed in circumstances which were far from satisfactory because the judge had not given explicit reasons to support the making of an indefinite order, the offender had given no indication whatsoever that he would address his offending behaviour and its causes. An order for an indefinite duration was necessary and proportionate.

DURATION INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN INDEFINITE DURATION NECESSITY AND PROPORTIONALITY NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES RISK OF HARM SENTENCING SEXUAL HARM PREVENTION ORDERS SUSPENDED SENTENCES

August 22, 2018

To establish “possession” for the purposes of the offences of possessing indecent images of children or extreme pornographic images, the prosecution had to establish (a) that the images were within the accused’s custody or control so that he was capable of accessing them, and (b) that he had known that he possessed images. Where unsolicited images were sent to the accused by the messaging application “WhatsApp” and automatically downloaded to his phone’s memory, it was highly likely that (a) would be made out; whether (b) was made out would depend on whether he knew he had received images.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JURY DIRECTIONS POSSESSION POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SOCIAL MEDIA

March 5, 2015

An extended sentence of 39 years, with a custodial term of 33 years, imposed in respect of a very large number of serious sexual offences against young girls was manifestly excessive; the appropriate custodial term was 30 years. The judge had also erred in adding up the consecutive sentences to reach the overall custodial term before imposing an extension period on the total: it was the overall extended determinate sentences that had to be consecutive, not just the custodial terms.

CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.226A EXTENDED SENTENCES INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN LARGE NUMBER OF SERIOUS SEXUAL OFFENCES AGAINST CHILDREN INCLUDING REPEATED RAPE OF MORE THAN ONE VICTIM MEETING CHILDREN FOLLOWING SEXUAL GROOMING POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT

February 10, 2015

A total sentence of five years’ imprisonment imposed following guilty pleas to making indecent images of children, distributing indecent images of children, possessing extreme pornographic images and causing a child to engage in sexual activity was reduced to four years. The sentencing judge had failed to categorise properly the nature of the defendant’s activity relating to the imagery in accordance with the relevant sentencing guidelines, in particular that he had simply downloaded the majority of the indecent photographs rather than participating in their production.

CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CULPABILITY INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN POSSESSION OF EXTREME PORNOGRAPHIC IMAGES SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES

October 8, 2013

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

January 31, 2013

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

July 6, 2012

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

Contact Stephen

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.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

 

"HISTORIC" OFFENCES ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST ADMISSIBILITY AGGRAVATING FEATURES ASSAULT BY PENETRATION ATTEMPTS BAD CHARACTER BUGGERY CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CHILDREN CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSENT CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DANGEROUSNESS DELAY EXTENDED SENTENCES FRESH EVIDENCE GUILTY PLEAS HUMAN RIGHTS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JURY DIRECTIONS MINIMUM TERM PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS RAPE RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL OFFENCES SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS SUMMING UP TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY YOUNG OFFENDERS