R v Raymond Alexander McLaren

In sentencing for wounding with intent, domestic abuse, the domestic setting and alcohol consumption may materially aggravate the offence. Positive character, personal difficulties and steps taken towards rehabilitation do not necessarily outweigh those features. Emotional turmoil arising from the breakdown of a relationship does not amount to provocation or mitigation where it does not reduce the offender’s responsibility. Credit for a guilty plea depends on the timing and unequivocal nature of the plea. Earlier or less serious offers do not necessarily justify enhanced credit. A sentence will stand where the sentencing judge has balanced aggravating and mitigating features lawfully and the result is neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

The appellant was sentenced in the Crown Court at Portsmouth to seven years’ imprisonment for wounding with intent under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He had pleaded guilty approximately one month before trial.

He appealed against sentence. He argued that the Recorder had placed too much weight on aggravating features, given too little weight to mitigation, and awarded insufficient credit for his guilty plea. The central issues were whether the notional sentence of eight years after trial was excessive and whether 12.5 per cent credit was appropriate.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The offence was within category B1, harm category 1, under the sentencing guideline for an offence contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The starting point was seven years’ imprisonment, with a range of six to ten years.

2. The domestic setting and the wider history of domestic abuse were significant aggravating features. The appellant’s consumption of alcohol on the evening also aggravated the offending. The Recorder was entitled to conclude that these features outweighed the personal mitigation.

3. The appellant was of positive good character and had made significant efforts in prison to address his alcohol use and abusive behaviour. However, his emotional turmoil following the breakdown of the relationship did not provide mitigation, and the evidence concerning his account of the incident and responsibility for it limited the weight available for remorse. The Recorder was entitled to impose a notional sentence after trial of eight years.

4. The unequivocal guilty plea to the section 18 offence was entered on 23 May 2023, shortly before the trial listed for 26 June. An earlier offer to plead to a section 20 offence had been rejected and materially underestimated the gravity of the offending. An earlier suggestion of a section 18 plea had not produced a settled basis of plea. In those circumstances, 12.5 per cent credit was within the range open to the Recorder and was not wrong in principle.

5. Considering the severe injuries, the use of a knife in the victim’s home, the abusive relationship and the appellant’s failure fully to accept responsibility, seven years’ imprisonment was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2023] EWCA Crim 1555, the appeal against sentence was dismissed.
• Crown Court at Portsmouth: On 7 July 2023, the appellant was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment after pleading guilty to wounding with intent.