[2025] EWCA Crim 1042

The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to these offences. Under those provisions, where a sexual offence has been committed against a person, no matter relating to that person shall during their lifetime be included in any publication if it is likely to lead members of the public to identify that person as the victim of that offence. This prohibition applies unless waived or lifted in accordance with section 3 of the Act.

On 31 May 2023, following a trial before HH Judge Sheridan DL and a jury at St Albans Crown Court, the appellant was convicted of two counts of rape (Counts 14 and 15 on a multiple count indictment) and one count of controlling/coercive behaviour, contrary to section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 (Count 16). He had pleaded guilty either shortly before trial or on the first day of trial to numerous other counts on the indictment, which mostly (but not solely) comprised sexual offences against the same victim, whom we shall call “C”. These included sexual activity with a child (counts 8, 9, 24, 25, and 26) and causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity (counts 10, 11 and 12). He was acquitted of a further count of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity (count 13) and the Crown offered no evidence against him on counts 1-7, which related to the period when C was aged under 13.

At a sentencing hearing on 21 December 2023, the appellant, by then aged 61, was found by the judge to be a dangerous offender. The judge took count 15, which related to five incidents of rape, as the lead offence, and passed an extended determinate sentence of 24 years (comprising a custodial element of 20 years plus an extended licence period of 4 years) on that count and on count 14 (a single rape), which he ordered to run concurrently, with shorter concurrent sentences on all other counts. Appropriate credit was given for his guilty pleas.

On 7 March 2025, a different constitution of this court gave the appellant leave to appeal against conviction and sentence, and granted a representation order for fresh counsel and solicitors. The court gave directions for the hearing of the appeal which have been fully complied with. Skeleton arguments were lodged in accordance with those directions by Mr Rosser on behalf of the appellant and by Mr Gledhill who appeared at trial, as he did before us, on behalf of the Crown. Further information was also obtained under the McCook procedure from counsel and solicitors who represented the appellant at trial.