RD, R v

In sentencing for a section 18 offence against a baby, comparisons with child-manslaughter sentences require caution. Manslaughter may lack the specific intent to cause really serious harm and its sentencing range is broad.

An isolated assault by an offender of good character may justify a sentence in the order of four to five years. Repeated ill-treatment, sustained violence, grave injury and a near-fatal outcome justify a substantially higher sentence. The totality principle requires a just aggregate sentence, but does not require sentences for separate assaults to run concurrently.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Kingston upon Hull to assault occasioning actual bodily harm and causing grievous bodily harm with intent against his infant son, G.

On two occasions he violently assaulted the child. The later attack included prolonged shaking, punches to the head and a deliberate drop to the floor. G sustained severe brain damage and was expected to remain profoundly disabled and dependent.

The sentencing judge imposed six years’ imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and two years consecutively for the assault. The appellant appealed against the total sentence of eight years, contending that mitigation and totality required a lower, concurrent sentence.

1. Appeal dismissed. The aggregate sentence of eight years’ imprisonment following guilty pleas was not manifestly excessive.

2. The court accepted that sentences for child manslaughter could provide some guidance, but stressed their limited comparability. A section 18 offence involves an intent to cause at least really serious harm, whereas manslaughter may not. The broad range of sentences for child manslaughter also requires caution.

3. Attorney General’s Reference No 34 of 2000 [2001] 1 Cr App R(S) 359 indicated that an isolated section 18 assault on a baby by an offender of good character would ordinarily attract about four to five years’ imprisonment. That benchmark did not govern this case, which involved two separate incidents of violence.

4. The earlier assault caused 14 rib fractures and possible brain damage. The later assault was sustained and exceptionally grave. The appellant shook the baby, repeatedly punched him to the head, and deliberately dropped him when he believed him to be dead. The child survived only through medical intervention and suffered severe, likely lifelong, disability.

5. Thomas (1986) 8 Cr App R(S) 75 and Askir Ali (1988) 10 Cr App R(S) 59 supported the conclusion that repeated ill-treatment warrants a significant increase from the isolated-incident range. The judge had considered totality and permissibly apportioned the overall sentence between the two counts. Consecutive terms were therefore appropriate.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): dismissed the appeal against sentence: [2005] EWCA Crim 159.

• Crown Court at Kingston upon Hull: following guilty pleas, imposed six years’ imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and two years’ imprisonment for assault occasioning actual bodily harm, consecutively.