The Court of Appeal has quashed the sentence imposed on K.S. for sexually assaulting and falsely imprisoning L, and producing a knife, after finding an error in the sentencing judge’s approach. It confirmed two six-year prison terms, suspended the final 18 months of each on condition that K.S. complete a sex offenders programme, and ordered 12 months of post-release supervision.
K.S. pleaded guilty on 30 July 2012 to offences arising from an incident in his bedroom on 23 January 2011. The sentencing judge imposed six years for sexual assault, six years for false imprisonment and four years for producing an article, with all terms running concurrently. K.S. was also placed on the Sex Offenders Register and given 18 months of post-release supervision.
The appeal argued that the sentence was excessive, that the sentencing judge had not adequately explained it, and that mitigating personal circumstances had not been properly considered. The Court of Appeal accepted that the judge’s sentencing remarks were brief. The judge had referred to the offences’ inherent gravity and credible threats to kill, as well as the early guilty plea, remorse and cooperation.
The appeal court said the judge had not mentioned that K.S. had no previous convictions. More significantly, it could not tell whether he had considered a detailed psychological report describing K.S. as a complex, troubled and vulnerable young man whose childhood and adolescence had been marked by serious difficulties. The court said that if the sentencing judge considered those matters irrelevant, he should have explained why. It held that this amounted to an error of principle and quashed the sentence.
In resentencing, the Court of Appeal said the sexual assault involving the production and use of a knife was particularly serious. It also noted that the assault left a mark on L’s abdomen for several weeks. The court accepted there was no intention to cause harm, and considered K.S.’s troubled background, the unlikelihood of reoffending and the prospect of rehabilitation. It said part of the sentence could and should be suspended.
The court confirmed the six-year terms for sexual assault and false imprisonment, suspending the final 18 months of each on condition that K.S. complete the sex offenders programme he was about to begin. The source does not state what became of the four-year term for producing an article in the appeal court’s final order. The court also imposed a 12-month post-release supervision order under section 28 of the Sex Offenders Act 2001.