R v Mark Barnfather

R v Mark Barnfather

The sentence of three years' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive given the seriousness of the offences, the mitigation available, and the Recorder's approach. However, the imposition of an indefinite SHPO was disproportionate; a 10-year term was appropriate.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Mark Barnfather
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentence upheld; SHPO varied
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Attempted Offences, Mitigation
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Sexual Harm Prevention Orders Attempted Offences Mitigation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Mark Barnfather

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custodial sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the mitigation available
  2. 2 Whether the Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) should have been imposed for an indefinite period

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of three years' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive given the seriousness of the offences, the mitigation available, and the Recorder's approach. However, the imposition of an indefinite SHPO was disproportionate; a 10-year term was appropriate.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentence upheld; SHPO varied

Orders

  • SHPO quashed as to indefinite duration and substituted with a 10-year term commencing 7 March 2025
  • Appeal against sentence otherwise dismissed