Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Martin Bayes

[2024] EWCA Crim 847
A man was given a long prison sentence for sexually abusing six children. The court mostly agreed with the sentence, but changed a couple of things because some parts of the sentence were wrong.

Key Facts

  • Martin Bayes convicted of 16 counts of sexual offending against 6 victims.
  • Sentenced to a 27-year extended sentence (22 years custody, 5 years extended license).
  • Offenses spanned a 20-year period, involving vulnerable children connected to Bayes through family.
  • Offenses included indecent assault, rape, and perverting the course of justice.
  • Bayes had prior convictions for sexual activity with a child and fraud.
  • The judge found Bayes to be dangerous under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
  • Several unlawful sentences were imposed (exceeding maximum penalties for specific offenses).
  • An unlawful victim surcharge was also imposed.

Legal Principles

Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: Protecting victim anonymity.

Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992

Sentencing Act 2020, section 385: Variation of sentences must be announced in open court.

Sentencing Act 2020

Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Surcharge) Order 2012: Victim surcharge applies only to offences committed on or after 1 October 2012.

Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Surcharge) Order 2012 (SI 2012/1696)

Sentencing guidelines for sexual offences.

Sentencing Guidelines

Principle of totality in sentencing.

Case law (implicit)

R v Leitch and Others [2024] EWCA Crim 563: Sentence variations must be announced in open court to be valid.

R v Leitch and Others [2024] EWCA Crim 563

Outcomes

Leave to appeal against sentence refused except for the correction of technical errors.

Sentences were not manifestly excessive. Judge properly applied sentencing principles and considered all relevant factors.

12-year sentences on counts 3 and 7 quashed and replaced with 10-year sentences.

The original sentences exceeded the maximum penalty for indecent assault.

Victim surcharge order quashed.

The surcharge order was unlawful due to some offenses predating October 1, 2012.

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.