Attorney General Reference No 7 of 2011
The original sentences for counts 3, 4, and 5 were too lenient given the gravity, abuse of trust, threats, and psychological harm. The sentence for count 7 should run consecutively. The sentence for computer images should run concurrently due to double jeopardy. The total sentence is increased to 6 years to properly reflect total criminality.
- Parties
- Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: John David Smith
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 March 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Reference / Appeal
- Outcome
- sentence increased
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Sexual Offences, Abuse of Trust, Double Jeopardy, Totality Principle
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Attorney General
Applicant
John David Smith
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Appropriate sentencing for historic sexual offences under Sexual Offences Act 1956 in light of Definitive Guidelines under Sexual Offences Act 2003
- 2 Application of totality principle in sentencing for multiple offences
- 3 Consideration of aggravating factors such as abuse of trust and psychological harm
Ratio Decidendi
The original sentences for counts 3, 4, and 5 were too lenient given the gravity, abuse of trust, threats, and psychological harm. The sentence for count 7 should run consecutively. The sentence for computer images should run concurrently due to double jeopardy. The total sentence is increased to 6 years to properly reflect total criminality.
Court Disposition
sentence increased
Orders
- Counts 3, 4, and 5 increased to 5 years imprisonment, concurrent.
- Count 7 (offence against girl H) to run consecutively to counts 1-6.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment