R v Lucy Wilding
[2024] EWCA Crim 1285
R v Nicole Lines
23 March 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 595
Court of Appeal
A woman had sex with a 15-year-old boy. She got a suspended prison sentence. The government tried to get her a longer sentence, but the court said the judge made the right call, considering all the facts.
Key Facts
- •Nicole Lines pleaded guilty to sexual activity with a 15-year-old boy (C), possession of indecent images of a child, and drug offenses.
- •The relationship between Lines and C lasted from October 2020 to April 2021. C had ASD and ADHD.
- •Lines was 25 at the time, a single mother of three.
- •Lines knew C was 15 but continued the relationship.
- •C recorded some sexual acts, and Lines kept the recordings and photos.
- •Lines supplied C with cannabis and alcohol.
- •Lines had previous minor offenses, but no prior convictions for sexual offenses.
- •The Crown Court sentenced Lines to 2 years' imprisonment suspended for 2 years with a rehabilitation activity requirement.
- •The Solicitor General appealed, arguing the sentence was unduly lenient.
Legal Principles
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: lifelong protection for child victims, prohibiting publication of identifying information.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Sexual Offences Act 2003, section 9: Offenses of sexual activity with a child.
Sexual Offences Act 2003
Criminal Justice Act 1988, section 160(1): Offenses of possession of indecent photographs of a child.
Criminal Justice Act 1988
Criminal Justice Act 1988, section 36: Attorney General's power to refer unduly lenient sentences.
Criminal Justice Act 1988
Sentencing Council's Definitive Guideline for offences of sexual activity with a child.
Sentencing Council Guidelines
Sentencing Code, section 59: Departing from sentencing guidelines in the interests of justice.
Sentencing Code
R v Petherick [2012] EWCA Crim 2214: Principles of sentencing.
R v Petherick [2012] EWCA Crim 2214
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal refused leave to refer the case.
The Court found the judge properly considered the guideline, mitigating factors (Lines' vulnerability, care of children, delay in prosecution), and the unusual circumstances of the case. While acknowledging the seriousness of the offenses, the Court deemed the suspended sentence to be within the judge's discretion.