R v Abbas Abbass
[2023] EWCA Crim 540
R v Marcus Taylor
17 May 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 615
Court of Appeal
A man was given a long prison sentence for rape and other sexual offences. He appealed, arguing the judge was wrong about some of the facts. The appeals court disagreed, saying the judge had good reasons for his decisions, and the sentence was fair.
Key Facts
- •Appellant (44-year-old with 22 previous convictions) convicted of rape, assault by penetration, and sexual assault.
- •Offence involved complainant (27-year-old) who had contacted appellant to discuss car repairs.
- •Appellant arrived at complainant's home, despite her attempts to cancel the meeting.
- •Appellant assaulted and raped complainant after she put her children to bed.
- •Appellant denied the rape, claiming consensual sex.
- •Victim impact statements detailed severe psychological harm, including panic attacks and medication.
- •Judge found significant planning, severe psychological harm, and particular vulnerability of the victim.
- •Appellant received an 18-year extended sentence (12 years custody, 6-year extension).
Legal Principles
The Court of Appeal will not interfere with a sentencing judge's findings of fact unless they are internally inconsistent, inconsistent with uncontroverted facts, or otherwise irrational.
Case law
Sentencing judges may assess psychological harm suffered by victims based on evidence from the victim, including victim personal statements, or their observation of the victim during evidence. Expert evidence is not necessary.
Offence-specific guideline for rape
Factors considered in determining vulnerability include the victim's ability to avoid, protest against, or report the offence.
R v Saunders [2022] EWCA Crim 264
Outcomes
Appeal against sentence dismissed.
The Court of Appeal found the judge's findings of fact regarding significant planning, severe psychological harm, and particular vulnerability were supported by evidence and not irrational. The overall sentence was not considered manifestly excessive.