The Solicitor General’s Submissions
The Solicitor General’s Submissions
The SG emphasises the seriousness of the offending, in particular that although the offending was non-penetrative, the Offender’s intention when committing the offence of attempted rape was to achieve penetration and that he came close to achieving that intention. Second, the SG relies upon the disparity in age between the Offender and V. Third, while accepting that the only reason why the Offender groomed and abused V was that he had been coerced by others he met online, the grooming and abuse was persistent. Fourth, in addition to committing the contact offences, he photographed them and posted 2 pictures online. Fifth, the impact on V has been significant as demonstrated by her mother’s second impact statement.
On the other side of the coin, the SG accepts that the Offender had mental health problems and a troubled upbringing, and was genuinely remorseful for what he had done. However, in the light of the identified factors the Solicitor General submits that the seriousness of the offences meant that a custodial sentence was inevitable. Failure to impose a custodial sentence should lead to the conclusion that the sentence passed by the Recorder was unduly lenient.
In oral submissions Mr Jarvis emphasised three particular points. The first was that Count 6 involved an attempt to penetrate that came very close to succeeding and which caused V pain. As he put it, it was not for lack of effort that Count 6 did not involve penetration. Second, he points to the fact that there were three serious contact sexual offences over time. This, he submits, supports the view that the offending overall was (a) persistent and (b) so serious that a non-custodial sentence was unavoidable. Third, he submits that the Recorder’s repeated references to and reliance upon coercion give that feature an unjustified prominence in the light of the expert evidence and the Offender’s own accounts (which we have cited above) demonstrating that the causes of his behaviour were multi-factorial and could not simply be attributed to his being ensnared by other people online.
![202501950 A5 - [2025] EWCA Crim 1047](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_sHeHK8V.png)