The Court of Appeal has quashed and replaced a 20-year sentence imposed on Jim Byrne for sexual offences against four children, suspending the final two and a half years unconditionally. It said the sentencing judge should have given specific weight to Byrne’s age, 68 at sentencing, when considering the lengthy custodial term.
The appeal concerned the severity of sentences imposed by the Central Criminal Court on 23 March 2018. Byrne had been convicted by a jury in August 2017 of two counts of rape and 27 counts of sexual assault involving his grandson. He had also pleaded guilty to charges on a separate bill concerning his three daughters: 20 counts of indecent assault, two counts of rape and one count of attempted rape.
The offences against the children spanned periods beginning in 1981 and continuing in a separate set of charges until February 2015. The prosecution’s case, as summarised in the appeal judgment, was that the abuse began when the complainants were children. The judgment records that the sentencing court heard evidence of serious and lasting effects on the complainants, including depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts.
The Central Criminal Court imposed an aggregate sentence of 20 years, structured as an eight-year term and three four-year terms, each consecutive. In its sentencing remarks, the trial judge said the appellant’s age and the totality principle had to be considered. Several rape sentences were made concurrent to avoid extending the custodial period further.
On appeal, Byrne argued that the sentence was excessive and that the trial judge had not sufficiently considered his personal circumstances, guilty pleas on one bill, proportionality and totality. The Court of Appeal said the offending was of the utmost gravity and that consecutive sentences were within the trial judge’s discretion. It also said a headline sentence of 20 years would not ordinarily be excessive for offending of this duration.
The appeal court’s concern was that, given the very lengthy sentence under consideration, Byrne’s age should have been addressed specifically. It observed that a 20-year term for a 68-year-old was likely to mean serving all or most of the person’s remaining life in custody, even allowing for remission. The court said specific consideration of age would likely have resulted in limited amelioration.
It therefore quashed the Central Criminal Court sentence and substituted the same sentence, with the final two and a half years suspended unconditionally. The judgment does not state that the convictions were overturned.