Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Kelechukwu Orji

[2024] EWCA Crim 879
A man was given 10 years in prison for multiple rapes and sexual assaults, but then ran away to Nigeria. The court decided that 10 years wasn't enough punishment and increased his sentence to 15 years, even though he wasn't there. They also kept an order in place to protect his daughter.

Key Facts

  • Kelechukwu Orji was convicted of two counts of rape, one count of attempted rape, one count of assault by penetration, and one count of sexual assault.
  • Orji absconded to Nigeria after being bailed.
  • He was sentenced in absentia to 10 years imprisonment (concurrent sentences).
  • The Attorney General referred the sentence as unduly lenient under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
  • Orji had no prior convictions and was employed by HMRC.
  • The victim, AB, was a Nigerian national in her early twenties who came to the UK at Orji's invitation to work as a home help.
  • The offences involved a campaign of sexual abuse over six weeks.
  • The judge considered mitigating factors such as shallow penetration and Orji's lack of prior convictions.
  • The victim provided a victim personal statement detailing significant psychological harm.

Legal Principles

The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 protects the anonymity of victims of sexual offences.

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 No 1 of 1989

When sentencing for multiple offences, the overall sentence must reflect all offending behaviour, harm, culpability, aggravating and mitigating factors, and be just and proportionate.

Sentencing Council Totality Guideline

The offender's absconding does not prevent the court from adjusting the sentence if necessary.

Court of Appeal decision in this case

Outcomes

The Court of Appeal allowed the Attorney General's reference and quashed the original 10-year sentence.

The original sentence was unduly lenient given the gravity and multiplicity of the offences, the significant harm caused to the victim, and the aggravating factors.

The Court of Appeal substituted a 15-year sentence on the lead offence (count 10).

This sentence better reflects the overall offending behaviour.

The Court of Appeal refused to amend the Sexual Harm Prevention Order.

The existing order was considered reasonable.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.