Weekes, R. v

In an Attorney-General’s reference for undue leniency, serious domestic violence must not be treated as less grave because it occurs within a family setting. It may be more serious. Sentencing must reflect the deliberate conduct of the offender as well as the resulting injury, including the victim’s vulnerability, use of a weapon, repeated violence, the presence of children and intervention needed to stop the attack.

A guilty plea, remorse, previous good character and personal difficulties may mitigate sentence. They cannot leave grave intentional violence substantially under-sentenced. When increasing an unduly lenient sentence, the court must allow for double jeopardy because the offender is being sentenced for a second time.

The Attorney-General sought leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer as unduly lenient a three-year sentence imposed at Snaresbrook Crown Court.

The offender had pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent, contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He attacked his wife with a hammer while she was on the floor, causing compound skull fractures. Their 13-year-old son witnessed the attack and intervened to stop it.

The central issue was whether the three-year sentence adequately reflected the gravity of the offence after allowing for the guilty plea, remorse, good character, depression, jealousy and alcohol consumption.

1. The court granted leave and held that the three-year sentence was unduly lenient. It substituted a sentence of four years and six months’ imprisonment.

2. The offence involved serious intentional violence against a defenceless victim. The aggravating features included the domestic setting, the children’s presence in the home, the use of a hammer against the victim’s head, repeated blows, severe skull fractures, and the fact that the attack ended only when the couple’s 13-year-old son intervened.

3. The court agreed with the observation in Attorney-General’s Reference No 98 of 2002 (R v Bishop), [2003] 2 Cr App R(S) 563, that domestic violence is no less serious than violence in another setting and can be more serious. The domestic context therefore did not diminish the need for an appropriately severe sentence.

4. The offender’s good character, guilty plea, remorse, depression and alcohol consumption were mitigating matters. They did not outweigh the seriousness of the deliberate attack.

5. The court considered that a sentence of between five years and six months and six years should have been imposed below. It reduced the substituted term to four years and six months to reflect double jeopardy: the offender was being sentenced a second time following the Attorney-General’s reference.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Granted leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, held the sentence unduly lenient, and substituted four years and six months’ imprisonment.
• Snaresbrook Crown Court: Following a guilty plea to an offence under section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, imposed three years’ imprisonment.