CROWN APPEALS AGAINST SENTENCE BY HMA AGAINST LB, JI, AND JT [2022] ScotHC HCJAC_48 (20 December 2022)

CROWN APPEALS AGAINST SENTENCE BY HMA AGAINST LB, JI, AND JT [2022] ScotHC HCJAC_48 (20 December 2022)

The sentences imposed on LB, JI, and JT were unduly lenient given the gravity, persistence, and aggravating features of their offending, including patterns of domestic abuse, sexual violence, and victim vulnerability. The sentencing judges erred in applying the Sentencing Guideline for Young People without sufficient evidential basis for reduced culpability, failed to reflect the totality of offending by imposing concurrent sentences, and in LB's case, imposed a SOPO without necessity. The appropriate disposals were cumulo extended sentences of 8 years for LB and JI, and 12 years for JT, with SOPOs quashed where unnecessary.

Citation
[2022] ScotHC HCJAC_48
Parties
Appellant: His Majesty's Advocate; Respondent: LB; Respondent: JI; Respondent: JT
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed; sentences quashed; new sentences imposed
Legal Topics
Rape, Domestic Abuse, Sexual Offences, Sentencing Guidelines, Extended Sentences, Sexual Offences Prevention Orders
Criminal Law Sentencing Rape Domestic Abuse Sexual Offences Sentencing Guidelines Extended Sentences Sexual Offences Prevention Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty's Advocate

Appellant

LB

Respondent

JI

Respondent

JT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed on LB, JI, and JT for rape and related offences were unduly lenient
  2. 2 Appropriateness of concurrent versus cumulo sentences for multiple offences
  3. 3 Application of the Sentencing Council for Scotland's Guideline on Sentencing of Young People

Ratio Decidendi

The sentences imposed on LB, JI, and JT were unduly lenient given the gravity, persistence, and aggravating features of their offending, including patterns of domestic abuse, sexual violence, and victim vulnerability. The sentencing judges erred in applying the Sentencing Guideline for Young People without sufficient evidential basis for reduced culpability, failed to reflect the totality of offending by imposing concurrent sentences, and in LB's case, imposed a SOPO without necessity. The appropriate disposals were cumulo extended sentences of 8 years for LB and JI, and 12 years for JT, with SOPOs quashed where unnecessary.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; sentences quashed; new sentences imposed

Orders

  • For LB: Cumulo extended sentence of 8 years (6 years custodial, 2 years extension), SOPO quashed
  • For JI: Cumulo sentence of 8 years imprisonment imposed