The Court of Appeal reduced the prison sentences imposed on C. M. for sexual offences against a child, finding that the sentencing judge had given insufficient weight to rehabilitation and the very low risk of reoffending identified in a psychological report.
C. M. had pleaded guilty to 15 counts of sexual assault and four counts of defilement of a child under 15. The Central Criminal Court sentenced him in February 2014 to 12 years on the defilement counts and nine years on the sexual assault counts, to run concurrently. The final three years of the 12-year terms were suspended, leaving an effective nine-year prison term. The sentences were backdated to 9 July 2013.
The appeal court said the offences involved serious sexual abuse over two to three years and a substantial breach of trust. The complainant was aged between 10 and 13 during the offending. The judgment said C. M. was his partner’s child and that the assaults occurred in the family home.
C. M. argued that the sentencing judge had not given enough weight to mitigating factors, including his guilty pleas, admissions, cooperation with gardaí, lack of previous convictions and willingness to undertake therapy. He also argued that the sentences did not facilitate treatment and that the starting point for the defilement counts was too high. The prosecution accepted that the sentences were not lenient, but submitted that the suspended portion reflected the mitigation.
The appeal court noted that the sentencing judge had been given a psychological report a week before sentencing. It described the report as very positive: it said C. M. acknowledged his wrongdoing, was willing to engage in therapy and was at the lowest measurable level of risk of future sexual offending. The appeal court also noted positive prison reports and that he was on a waiting list for a treatment programme.
The court found a limited error of principle, particularly in the 12-year defilement sentences. It substituted 10-year terms for those offences and seven-and-a-half-year terms for the sexual assaults, all concurrent. It suspended the final two-and-a-half years of the 10-year terms on similar conditions to those set by the lower court, producing an effective seven-and-a-half-year prison term. The suspension period was set at two years. A condition allows C. M. to apply while in prison to enrol in a sex-offender programme and to participate in any programme made available to him.
The judgment does not state that the appeal court changed the other orders described in the original sentence, including post-release supervision and the no-contact direction.