R v Roy Mackenzie

R v Roy Mackenzie

The sentencing judge erred in finding abuse of trust, resulting in an excessive sentence; proper categorisation was category 2B, warranting a starting point of 12 months' imprisonment, and aggravating and mitigating factors did not justify suspension of sentence.

Parties
Prosecutor: Rex; Appellant: Roy Mackenzie
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Abuse of Trust, Mitigation, Suspension of Sentence
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Abuse of Trust Mitigation Suspension of Sentence

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Roy Mackenzie

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding abuse of trust and higher culpability
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  3. 3 Whether the sentence should have been suspended

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in finding abuse of trust, resulting in an excessive sentence; proper categorisation was category 2B, warranting a starting point of 12 months' imprisonment, and aggravating and mitigating factors did not justify suspension of sentence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Sentences on both counts quashed
  • Sentences of 12 months' imprisonment imposed for each offence