header-logo header-logo

18 May 2022
Issue: 7979 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Sentencing guidelines for arranging & facilitating

The Sentencing Council has revised its guidelines on sentencing offenders convicted of arranging or facilitating sexual offences against a child, and issued a new guideline on sexual communication with a child

Current guidelines, published in 2013, have been interpreted in cases where sexual activity was incited but did not actually occur to mean that harm should be considered low or the absence of actual harm to a child should be considered a mitigating factor.

Under the revised guidelines, which come into effect on 31 May, however, judges and magistrates will look at the intended sexual harm, regardless of whether the activity takes place, for example, in a police ‘sting’ operation. The maximum penalties are life imprisonment for arranging or facilitating if the rape of a child under 12 years old is planned, and 14 years’ imprisonment for causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.

The Court of Appeal requested the revisions following Privett & Ors [2020] EWCA Crim 557, in which an offence was arranged and facilitated but there was no child, and Reed & Ors [2021] EWCA Crim 572, in which sexual activity was incited but did not take place.

Sentencing Council member, Judge Rosa Dean, said: ‘Judges and magistrates will impose sentences that reflect the intended harm to the child, even where that activity does not ultimately take place, to protect children from people planning to cause them sexual harm.’

Under the new guideline for the offence of sexual communication with a child, offenders face a maximum penalty of two years in prison for sharing images, causing psychological harm, abuse of trust or the use of threats or bribes. This takes effect on 1 July 2022.

The Council also clarified that offences against victims overseas should be treated as seriously as offending against victims in England and Wales.
Issue: 7979 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll