R v DCB
[2024] EWCA Crim 554
R v ATD
21 March 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 366
Court of Appeal
A man was given a 4-year sentence for sexually assaulting his young daughter decades ago. The court found this too short and increased it to 7 years because the crime was very serious and had a devastating effect on his daughter. The judges explained how they should decide sentences in cases like this, where the crimes happened long ago.
Key Facts
- •70-year-old offender convicted of sexual assault of his daughter (C) when she was 4-5 years old (between 1991-1993).
- •Offence involved digital penetration.
- •Offender denied the allegations throughout the process.
- •Victim suffered significant and long-lasting psychological and physical harm (hair-pulling disorder).
- •Offender had one previous unrelated conviction in 1984.
- •Original sentence: 4 years' imprisonment with a 1-year extended licence.
- •Attorney General's reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 for being unduly lenient.
Legal Principles
Reporting restrictions under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to protect the victim's identity.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
A sentence is unduly lenient if it falls outside the range of sentences a judge could reasonably consider appropriate.
Attorney General's Reference Number 4 of 1989
When sentencing for historical sexual offences, the judge must make a measured reference to the current sentencing guidelines, taking into account the maximum sentence applicable at the time of the offence.
R v H [2011], Forbes and others [2016] EWCA Crim 1388, Attorney General's Reference 27 of 2015
In historical sexual offence cases, previous good character should not normally significantly affect sentencing.
Sentencing Council's Sexual Offences Definitive Guideline
Outcomes
The original sentence was deemed unduly lenient.
The judge's starting point of 4.5 years was not reasonably justifiable given the severity of the offence and the significant harm caused, even considering mitigating factors. The Court of Appeal found a sentence of 7 years imprisonment with a one-year extended licence to be appropriate.