The Court of Appeal reduced the additional prison term imposed on D.N. for raping and sexually assaulting a child, finding that the original five-year consecutive sentence was disproportionate when added to sentences he was already serving. The court resentenced him to a further 2½ years in prison for the rape offences, bringing his aggregate term to 21½ years before remission.
D.N. appealed the severity of sentences imposed by the Central Criminal Court after he pleaded guilty to two counts of rape and 36 counts of sexual assault. The offences involved W, who was aged between 11 and 17 during the period described in the judgment, and took place between 1994 and 2000. The court said the offending included repeated abuse at a parochial house and at other locations.
The Central Criminal Court had imposed five years for one rape count, with the second rape count taken into consideration, and three years on each sexual assault count. Those sentences were concurrent with one another but consecutive to a 19-year aggregate term arising from earlier cases. The practical effect was a 24-year aggregate sentence before remission, with an anticipated release date of March 2032.
D.N. argued that the consecutive sentence was excessive and crushing, and that the sentencing judge had not adequately applied the totality principle. The Director of Public Prosecutions opposed the appeal, submitting that the judge had considered the relevant mitigation, including D.N.’s age, guilty pleas, remorse and participation in a treatment programme.
The Court of Appeal said consecutive sentencing was appropriate because the offending against W warranted separate punishment. But it concluded that the sentencing judge’s adjustment for totality was insufficient. Had all the cases been sentenced together, the court considered the overall term would likely have been 21 or 22 years, rather than 24.
The court quashed the sentences and resentenced D.N. It set an eight-year post-mitigation term for the rape offences, then reduced it by 5½ years to account for totality, leaving a 2½-year term consecutive to the existing 19 years. Count 24 remains taken into consideration. For the sexual assaults, it approved the three-year post-mitigation terms as appropriate before adjustment, reduced each to 2½ years, and ordered them to run concurrently with one another and consecutively to the existing sentences. The judgment states that the new aggregate term is 21½ years before remission.