Sentencing for Sexual Offences
Sentencing guidelines help judges in England and Wales take a consistent approach to sentencing. Two people may commit the same offence; however, this can happen in different ways with differing results, and therefore the sentence would not be the same and the courts would impose a sentence to properly reflect the individual circumstances of that offence. By law, judges and magistrates must sentence according to the guidelines, unless it would be unjust to do so.
There are
guidelines for most sexual offences
which set out the factors the court should consider. The guidance sets out different levels of sentence based on the harm caused to the complainant and the blameworthiness of the defendant. Where there are no specific guidelines, the court refers to the General Guideline for Sentencing Offences.
The General guideline came into force on 1 October 2019. Judges may also refer to important Court of Appeal judgments to examine how sentences have been reached for similar cases in the past.
Sexual Assault Sentencing Example:
The maximum sentence set by legislation for sexual assault is 10 years imprisonment, the range given starts at a community order to 7 years custody.
The sentencing guidelines set out the approach to sentencing in stages.
Step 1 - Determining the Offence Category
The court will consider the facts of the case and categorise the level of harm caused. They will then establish the culpability of the offender. The list is non exhaustive and the court can take into consideration factors which may not be present on the list provided.
Step 2 - Starting Point and Category Range
Once the category has been determined the court move to step 2, and use the category range to put the case into a sentencing bracket which provides a range of a sentencing options. Where a case falls within the range can be determined by the aggravating and mitigating factors set out below. The more aggravating features in a case, the higher up in the sentencing bracket the matter will fall, this may then be balanced out by any mitigation given by the defendant.
Aggravating and Mitigating Factors
Once the above is established the sentencing judge will then have regard to the below factors.
- Any assistance given to police or prosecution
- Reduction for early guilty pleas
- Is the offending so serious that the dangerousness provisions apply warranting an extended sentence
- The totality principle. If sentencing an offender for more than one offence, or where the offender is already serving a sentence, the court will consider whether the total sentence is just and proportionate to the offending behaviour
- Whether ancillary orders are required, or whether any are mandatory. This can include Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Restraining Orders, and also consideration must be given to the defendant becoming subject to the notification requirements of the Sex Offenders Register.
- The court are required under section 174 Criminal Justice Act 2003 to give reasons for the sentence. This includes explaining the effect of the sentence.
- The court must consider giving credit for time spent on bail or remand.
Sentencing a defendant for a sexual offence or violent offence can be a very difficult process and there is not one fixed way in which the court will approach sentence, or the particular circumstances of the offence but in the majority of cases, the sentence must be within the applicable guidelines provided.
How We Can Help You
Our lawyers can give you sentencing advice based on the circumstances of your case and any aggravating or mitigating factors which may apply. We can also assist in ensuring your case is prepared strongly for sentence by providing expert guidance on the best mitigation you can gather to assist in obtaining the most lenient sentence possible.
If you have any questions in relation to sentencing for a specific offence or how a sentence and any ancillary orders may affect you, contact us today for a free, no obligation discussion.
We Can Help With
Have you been charged with indecent image possession? Do you want to know how many cases get dropped? Read our latest article to learn more.
Understanding the difference between “consent” and “reasonable belief” can be key if you are being investigated or prosecuted for a sexual offence, where these two issues can arise. These are not just technical legal terms; they are real-world concepts that can affect the outcome of serious sexual abuse cases. At Eventum Legal, our aim is to help people grasp these important ideas so that they know where they stand, whether they’re seeking justice, facing an accusation, or just wanting to be informed. Consent and the Law: What Does It Mean? When it comes to sexual activity, the law makes it very clear that “consent” isn’t just about saying yes or no. Consent means agreeing by choice, having the freedom and capacity to make that choice, and being able to change your mind at any time, even if the sexual activity has begun. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that a person consents if they agree by choice and have the freedom and capacity to do so. In practical terms, this means no one should be pressured, forced, or tricked into sex. If someone is too drunk, too scared, or otherwise unable to decide, they cannot legally give consent. This applies also to issues with mental capacity where someone may not have the understanding or ability to give informed consent. When establishing whether consent or reasonable belief applies, the courts examine everything that happened, how the people involved acted, what was said, their relationship, and whether any threats were made. It’s not about just hearing a yes or no, but about whether the agreement was truly given, freely and knowingly, at the time. Reasonable Belief: The Other Side of the Coin While “consent” focuses on the person on the receiving end of sexual activity, “reasonable belief” is about the perspective of the person accused of the crime. UK law says it’s not enough for someone to claim they thought the other person was consenting. The belief that consent existed must be reasonable; it must meet the standard of what a reasonable person would think in those circumstances. This comes down to two questions: did the accused genuinely believe the other person was consenting, and would a reasonable person, knowing what the accused knew and considering everything that happened, have reached the same conclusion? It’s not a defence to say, “I just thought it was okay,” if evidence, actions, or common sense didn’t back that belief up. Courts look at whether the accused checked for consent, paid attention to what was happening, and took steps to make sure everything was agreed upon. How the Law Applies These Concepts The distinction between consent and reasonable belief matters because everyone is responsible for ensuring that consent is present, not just assuming or hoping it is. The prosecution in a sexual offence case has to prove that there was no consent or that the accused did not have a reasonable belief that consent existed. To judge this, courts examine the context: Were both people sober and able to make decisions? Was there clear, positive agreement? Did one person ignore signs of hesitation or discomfort? In cases where someone is very intoxicated or unable to communicate, the law presumes that there is no consent, and it is challenging for anyone to claim a reasonable belief otherwise. However, where alcohol is in question the issue can become complex as we all have difference alcohol tolerances, what may be too drunk to one person, could be different to the other. Therefore, working to establish the intoxication and affect is crucial for lawyers in some cases. In cases where it can be proven that that someone was too drunk to speak or move, and the accused says they thought there was consent just because the person didn’t say “no,” the court is unlikely to accept that as reasonable. The law expects people to check in with their partner, look for positive signs, and stop if there’s any doubt. Clearing Up Common Myths Many misunderstandings exist about how consent and reasonable belief work in real life. One myth is that if someone doesn’t say “no,” they must have agreed. The absence of a “no” is not the same as a “yes.” Another myth is that if two people are in a relationship or have had sex before, consent is always assumed. Every sexual act requires consent, every time. Some people also believe that as long as they honestly thought there was consent, that’s enough. But the law sets a higher bar: the belief has to be reasonable, meaning it must be backed up by what happened and what a reasonable person would think. In our digital age, misunderstandings can easily happen through text or online communication. Courts are aware of this and look at all available evidence, including messages and social media, to determine what happened. Other avenues of evidence exploration can include CCTV footage and witnesses. Why These Legal Standards Matter The way UK law approaches consent and reasonable belief has changed over time. In the past, people could argue they had an “honest” belief in consent, even if it wasn’t reasonable. That changed with the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which now requires honesty and reasonableness. This protects people from harm and ensures that the law takes the experiences and choices of everyone involved seriously. These rules are designed to keep people safe and ensure everyone’s rights are respected. The law encourages open communication, respect, and responsibility. It expects everyone to look for clear signs of agreement and to stop if there is any doubt or hesitation. What To Do If You’re Involved In A Sexual Offence Case Suppose you’re facing a situation involving consent or reasonable belief and you as the accused want to prove that either of these legal requirements existed, then you must seek legal advice and engage with specialist lawyers who can navigate the complexities of the key legal issues in sexual offence cases. These cases can be stressful and complex, and every detail matters: what was said, what was done, and what steps were taken to ensure everyone agreed. At Eventum Legal, we specialise in helping people understand their rights and responsibilities. We listen, explain your options in straightforward language, and support you throughout the process, always with respect and confidentiality. Whether you’re seeking justice, defending your reputation, or simply want to know your rights, we’re here to help. Frequently Asked Questions What is the difference between consent and reasonable belief? Consent is when a person freely agrees to a sexual act. Reasonable belief is whether the accused genuinely and reasonably believed that consent was given, based on all the facts. Can someone be convicted if they misunderstood consent? Yes, if their belief in consent wasn’t reasonable. The court looks at the whole situation, not just what the accused thought. How can I protect myself or prove consent? Open communication and ensuring everyone is comfortable and willing are the safest approaches. If you’re worried about misunderstandings, keep records of conversations. Where can I get help or advice? Contact Eventum Legal for confidential, expert support tailored to your needs.
Have you been accused of breaching your SHPO, maybe by accident or knowingly? Speak to our specialist team.
