The Court of Appeal reduced the sentence imposed on a man convicted of three sexual assaults on his granddaughter, finding that the original headline sentence of seven years was too severe for the conduct described.
The court re-sentenced the appellant to four years’ imprisonment and ordered two years of post-release supervision. It did not disturb the jury’s convictions. His appeal against conviction had already been refused in an earlier judgment; this ruling concerned sentence only.
The offences were charged as having occurred on dates unknown across three periods between July 2015 and May 2016. The girl was born in 2006. The judgment said she was aged 12 at trial and that her 10th birthday fell in July 2016. Her grandfather was born in 1951.
At trial, the girl described being tickled and touched or rubbed on her private parts, sometimes over and sometimes under her clothes. She also said that on one occasion her grandfather asked her to touch his penis over his clothes. The judgment records that she said she felt uncomfortable and that the incidents occurred during overnight stays at her grandparents’ home. These were her allegations and evidence; the appellant denied touching her inappropriately and told the jury he was never alone with the children.
The jury found him guilty on 13 May 2019. The trial judge imposed six years on each count, to run concurrently, with the final 12 months suspended on conditions. The appellant challenged the sentencing judge’s selection of a seven-year headline sentence, arguing that the offending belonged in a lower category and that his age, lack of previous convictions and employment history warranted greater weight. The prosecution argued the sentence properly reflected the repeated offending, the victim’s age, the grandfather-granddaughter relationship and breach of trust, among other factors.
The Court of Appeal accepted that the offending involved three offences over about 10 months and serious aggravating features, including the relationship, breach of trust, the girl’s age and the impact on her. But it said sentencing had to distinguish between different kinds of sexual assault. It concluded that seven years was too severe for the conduct described, even allowing for those aggravating factors.
The court set a headline sentence of five and a half years, reduced it to four years to account for mitigating factors, and added two years of post-release supervision. The judgment states that the appellant was detained at Midlands Prison at the time.