Frost, R. v

A discretionary life sentence may be appropriate where the offending is exceptionally serious and the offender’s character and conduct show that the point at which he will cease to present a significant risk of serious harm cannot reliably be predicted. The assessment may properly rest on the scope, frequency and persistence of the offending. Continued pursuit of sexual gratification through child-abuse material after contact offending has ceased may support a finding of a continuing danger to children.

The applicant pleaded guilty at Maidstone Crown Court to ten counts of rape, nine counts of indecent assault, and offences of making and possessing indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children. The contact offences concerned prolonged sexual abuse of his three step-daughters. The material recovered also recorded that abuse and included other child-abuse images.

He received concurrent life sentences for rape, with an eight-year minimum term, and concurrent determinate sentences for the remaining offences. He renewed an application to challenge the life sentences. The issue was whether those sentences were appropriate and necessary in light of the seriousness of the offending and the risk he posed.

1. The court refused the renewed application. The life sentences were both appropriate and necessary.

2. A life sentence required, first, offending serious enough to justify a long custodial sentence and, secondly, an offender whose unstable character made it impossible reliably to identify when he would cease to pose a significant risk of serious harm through further offending.

3. The first requirement was plainly met. The sustained rape and abuse of three children in the applicant’s care, including the recording of the abuse, was exceptionally grave.

4. The second requirement was also met despite the absence of medical or psychiatric evidence. The sentencing judge was entitled to infer continuing danger from the scope, frequency and depth of the abuse over two years. The applicant’s continued acquisition and retention of child-abuse material after his access to the girls had ended reinforced the conclusion that he was a devious and committed paedophile who remained a serious danger to children for the foreseeable future.

5. The guilty pleas and absence of threats did not displace that assessment. There was no challenge to the minimum term or to the other orders.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): renewed application against the life sentences refused: [2006] EWCA Crim 1798.
• Crown Court at Maidstone: following guilty pleas, imposed concurrent life sentences for rape with an eight-year minimum term, together with concurrent sentences and ancillary orders.