The Court of Appeal has upheld an 11-year sentence imposed on T Q for repeatedly sexually assaulting his younger cousin over several years when she was a child.
In a judgment delivered on 24 April 2026, the court dismissed his appeal against sentence and found no error in the Central Criminal Court’s decision to impose an 11-year term with the final 12 months suspended.
T Q was convicted after a three-week trial of 17 counts of sexual assault contrary to section 2 of the Criminal Law (Rape)(Amendment) Act 1990. Four counts related to specific incidents, while 13 were sample counts covering periods between 2010 and 2014.
The victim was between eight-and-a-half and 13 years old during the offending. She had moved with her siblings into the appellant’s family home because of difficult family circumstances. The court said the abuse generally occurred when she and T Q were alone in the house and continued over approximately four years.
At sentencing on 14 October 2024, the trial judge selected a 12-year headline term, reduced it by one year for mitigation and suspended the final 12 months to support rehabilitation.
T Q argued on appeal that the headline sentence was too high and that greater credit should have been given for factors including his lack of previous convictions, employment history, intellectual functioning, family circumstances and later acceptance of the jury’s verdict.
The Court of Appeal rejected those submissions. Applying its later guideline judgment in DPP v GN, it said the offending displayed several features associated with the upper range of seriousness, including the victim’s young age and vulnerability, repeated offending over a prolonged period and a serious breach of trust.
The court also held that intimidation, grooming or threats were not required before offending could fall into that upper category. It found the one-year reduction and suspended final year were both within the sentencing judge’s discretion.
The appeal was dismissed.