Court of Appeal: 61-year-old who raped a pregnant woman as she slept has sentence reduced to six years
Reading time: 4 minutes
A man who was convicted of raping a pregnant woman as she slept alone in her bedroom has successfully appealed the severity of his sentence, having had his sentence of seven-and-a-half years’ imprisonment quashed, and varied by the Court of Appeal to six years’ imprisonment.
About this case:
- Judgment:
Delivering the judgment of the three-judge Court, Mr Justice John Edwards emphasised the man’s previous good behaviour and the fact that this was his first offence. As such, it was appropriate to follow the sentiment that there was ‘no logical basis for denying mitigation to first time offenders solely on account of the nature of the offence’.
Background
The conviction arose out of events which occurred in October 2010, when the man, “JD”, had been out socialising with the victim, her mother, and her sister. The Court heard that JD knew the victim’s mother from doing odd jobs for her.
After going to bed alone, and JD being asleep on the couch downstairs, the victim ‘awoke in the early hours of the morning to a bad pain in her backside’. She quickly realised that JD ‘was in her bed, on top of her, and engaging in the act of anal intercourse with her’. The Court heard that she managed to scream and ran into the room in which her mother and sister were sleeping, who then observed JD walking down the stairs.
JD denied having raped the woman, and claimed that he had not made his way upstairs in any event.
In her victim impact statement, the woman described how she was not able to return to her home after the incident due to the trauma of the incident, and that she had to move with her two sons to another town.
Furthermore, the Court heard that the victim’s ‘pregnancy was blighted by concerns about possible HIV infection, antiviral medication, regular visits for blood tests, concerns about potential damage to her unborn child, which persisted despite medical reassurances. Her relationship with the father of her unborn child suffered, because of his difficulty in coming to terms with the fact of the rape’.
In December 2015 JD was convicted by a jury of a single count of rape contrary to section 4 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990.
In February 2016, he was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years’ imprisonment.
Grounds of Appeal
JD contended that his sentence was unduly severe on grounds that:
Analysis and Decision
Considering The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v T.V. IECA 370 ; The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Power IECA 37; The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v W. D. 1 I.R.308 - Counsel for JD accepted that a headline sentence of seven and half years’ imprisonment was in line with sentences for comparable crimes.
Counsel for JD complained that the sentencing judge gave ‘no discount at all for mitigation’.
Quashing the sentencing judge’s sentence, Mr Justice Edwards proceeded to resentence JD on the basis of a headline sentence of 8 years.
Describing the man as a ‘model prisoner’ and the fact that he had no previous convictions, Justice Edwards was satisfied that there was ‘no logical basis for denying mitigation to first time offenders solely on account of the nature of the offence’.
Allowing a discount of 25 per cent for mitigating factors, HD was sentence to a term of six years imprisonment to be served from the date of his December 2015 conviction.
Share this article:
Subscribe to our newsletter to not miss articles like this one:
SUBSCRIBE
