The Court of Appeal varied the sentence imposed on T.B., suspending the final 18 months of the six-year sentences on condition that he take part in the Better Lives Programme while in prison. It also ordered 18 months of post-release supervision.
T.B. had pleaded guilty to 14 counts of indecent assault and received an overall sentence of nine years’ imprisonment. The appeal court set aside the original sentence and reimposed concurrent sentences across the counts, with the sentences on counts 1 and 2 running consecutively to the sentences on the remaining counts. It directed that the sentences on counts 1 and 2 commence on 26 May 2014.
Counts 1 and 2 concerned assaults on SS, described in the judgment as T.B.’s niece, in 1987, when she was six. The other counts concerned assaults on BT, described as his sister-in-law, between 1978 and 1984. The judgment recounts the victims’ accounts of repeated abuse, which began when BT was five. Their victim impact reports were read at the sentencing hearing.
The appeal argued that the sentencing judge had not adequately considered mitigation, structured the sentence to allow for therapy, or identified the appropriate starting sentence. The Court of Appeal said the sentencing remarks did not refer to a report prepared by three psychologists for the defence. The report described T.B. as having been repeatedly raped over a year when he was eight or nine, and said his history of sexual abuse and psychological difficulties were relevant to the context of his offending.
The appeal court said the judge needed to address the report, including if he rejected its findings or considered them irrelevant. It was difficult for the appeal court to determine what credit had been given for mitigation. The court considered that the original nine-year term was not far from the appropriate sentence if the report were left aside, but concluded that the matters in the report required part of the sentence to be suspended.
The court also noted the seriousness and lasting effects of the offences, and said rehabilitation should be incorporated where possible. It required participation in the prison programme as a condition of suspending the final 18 months of each six-year sentence. The judgment records that the appellant had expressed willingness to take part.