B, R. v (Rev 1)

In sentencing for causing a child to engage in sexual activity, the protection afforded by the criminal law applies to children of every cultural background. A parent’s claimed loving motive, cultural upbringing and lack of sexual gratification may mitigate, but do not excuse, conduct which knowingly exposes a child to unlawful sexual intercourse and serious harm.

On an appeal against sentence, the court decides whether the sentence was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. It will not use an ordinary appeal, without the appropriate parties or guideline context, to prescribe general sentencing ranges for an unusual class of offending.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Snaresbrook Crown Court to causing her 15-year-old daughter to engage in sexual activity involving intercourse, contrary to section 10(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. She had arranged a customary ceremony through which her daughter, then aged 15, lived with an adult man who subsequently abused her.

HHJ Lamb QC rejected the appellant’s claim that she did not know the age of consent. He found that she had used the arrangement to control her daughter and imposed eight months’ immediate imprisonment. The appellant appealed with leave, contending that she acted from love and consistently with her cultural background, so that custody was unjustified.

1. Appeal dismissed. The eight-month immediate custodial sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

2. The court accepted the probation officer’s balanced assessment that the appellant’s motive was complex. She did not act maliciously, but her conduct was driven materially by a desire to control her daughter and maintain appearances. Her claimed wish to do what was best for her daughter did not accurately describe the whole motivation.

3. The law governing the offence protects children from every cultural background. The appellant’s isolated life, upbringing and own early marriage were mitigating circumstances, but could not excuse her unlawful conduct. She knew that sexual intercourse would follow the ceremony. Although she did not intend harm, her attempt to control her daughter’s life exposed the child to serious harm.

4. The court declined to give broader guidance on sentencing for this type of offence. Facts may differ substantially between cases; this was not a guideline case; and the prosecution was unrepresented. The court confined its decision to the narrow appellate question raised by the sentence imposed.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The appeal against sentence was dismissed: [2010] EWCA Crim 315.
• Crown Court at Snaresbrook: HHJ Lamb QC sentenced the appellant to eight months’ imprisonment after a guilty plea to an offence contrary to section 10(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.