The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against the severity of a 12½-year prison sentence imposed on a man convicted of coercive control, assaults, intimidation and attempting to pervert the course of justice. The final two years were suspended on terms.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy on 30 March 2023, said the man was convicted in November 2020 of coercive control, 12 counts of assault causing harm, assault and intimidation. He also pleaded guilty to attempting to pervert the course of justice on a second indictment.
The offences involved his former partner. The court’s account described repeated physical and emotional abuse between 2018 and 2020, including assaults that caused a fractured arm and a head injury requiring seven staples. The partner also reported being threatened with the distribution of intimate images unless she withdrew her complaint.
The separate attempt to pervert the course of justice involved calls made while the man was in custody. The judgment said 245 calls took place between them, 146 of which were recorded. It said he sought to have her withdraw complaints and, at times, claim that injuries were self-inflicted or accidental.
The appeal challenged the headline sentences for coercive control, intimidation and attempting to pervert the course of justice, as well as the decision to make the sentences for two serious assaults consecutive. The appellant argued that the overall term was disproportionate and that the sentencing judge had given insufficient weight to mitigation and rehabilitation.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the headline sentences. It said the coercive-control offending involved a prolonged campaign of fear, humiliation and violence, and that the intimidation offence was planned, committed while the man was on bail, and involved threats to expose intimate images to the partner’s family and online.
On the calls made from custody, the court said the repeated attempts to influence the partner had to be assessed in the context of the earlier offending. It found no error in the sentencing judge’s approach to the headline sentence for that offence.
The court also upheld the consecutive sentences for two assaults about six months apart: a headbutt while the partner was recovering from unrelated nose surgery, and an assault that fractured her arm. It said the offences were not committed within a relatively short period and the sentencing judge was entitled to mark their seriousness in that way.
The court concluded that the sentencing judge had properly considered the mitigating factors and the totality of the offending. It dismissed the appeal, leaving the sentence of 12½ years’ imprisonment, with the final two years suspended on terms, in place.