Man jailed for raping his 12 year old brother

Man jailed for raping his 12 year old brother

3
SHARE

Introduction

On 25th November 2014 a man (unnamed, in order to protect the victim’s identity) aged 23, was sentenced having pleading guilty to raping his brother. There aren’t many details, but it seems that this occurred last year at the boys house.

The boys’ parents were alerted by the noise of the attack but the defendant warned his brother he would be “beaten up if he told what had happened,” the court heard.

That is pretty much all the details that we have. We do know that the man had “had thoughts of raping [his] brother on a previous occasion but that [he] blocked them out using cannabis and alcohol“.

 

Sentence

The Judge found that the man was dangerous and passed an extended sentence. This is perhaps not surprising in the circumstances. The sentence was 7 years, with a 3 year extension period. Because this is an extended sentence, he will have to serve a minimum of 2/3 of the 7 year sentence, before being released automatically.

This is a case where the Sentencing Guidelines for sexual offences apply. The guidance for rape of a child under 13 is at page 27. We don’t have any of the facts, but given credit for a plea this would indicate a starting point of about 10 years.

It is a good example of when an extended sentence should be imposed. It also shows the impact of an extended sentence. In terms of the amount of time to be served, it is equivalent to a ‘normal’ sentence of 9 1/3 years.

 

SHARE
Dan is a barrister at 2 Dr. Johnson’s Buildings practising in crime.

3 COMMENTS

  1. I don’t see why an extended sentence here is a “good use of the power”-why not just impose a higher sentence of iimprisonment eg ten years? And what are the “benfits” of an extendeed sentence apart from longer licence?

    • It’s not permissible to do that, for two (linked) reasons:
      1. in determining the custodial portion of an extended sentence, it is treated as though it is an ordinary determinate sentence – therefore the term will (in theory) be the same length whether or not an extended sentence is imposed;
      2. because of the above, it is subject to the requirement that it be for the shortest term possible commensurate with the seriousness of the offence etc. and therefore to inflate it as you suggest would be unlawful.

      What you are advocating is a “longer than commensurate” sentence, which has long been repealed and replaced with new sentences designed to protect the public, EDS, IPP, EPP etc.

      This is in my view a good use of an extended sentence-the extended licence provides additional protection beyond that of the licence which accompanies an ordinary custodial term (as you suggest in your question), however the important reason why an extended sentence is more desirable here is due to the release provisions. If, as you suggest, the sentence was inflated to say, 10 years, he would serve 5 in and 5 on licence. This 10 year extended sentence (7 custody, 3 extended licence) means he serves 4.6 years in (almost 5) and then 5.4 years on licence, and so you can see that the custodial term is almost the same, yet the licence is longer. (Although for the reasons stated above such a course would not be permitted)

  2. This is the first time I have heard a defendant say that cannabis and alcohol prevented them from committing an offence

LEAVE A REPLY