R v Lewis Lloyd Young

In sentencing serious offending involving rape and kidnapping, the court may treat rape as the lead offence and take abduction, detention, violence, weapons, dangerous driving and other offences into account as aggravating context, provided totality is respected and impermissible double counting is avoided. Where the offending is exceptionally serious, a sentence substantially above the upper range for category 1A rape may be justified. The absence of a kidnapping guideline does not prevent assessment of its distinct seriousness by reference to planning, detention, violence, weapons, victim impact and vulnerability. A minimum term imposed on that basis will stand unless it is manifestly excessive.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Salisbury to kidnapping, possessing a bladed article, dangerous driving, driving while disqualified, assault by penetration and rape. The sentencing judge imposed concurrent life sentences for kidnapping and rape, with a minimum term of 12 years under section 323 of the Sentencing Act 2020, and concurrent terms for the other offences. The appellant challenged only the length of the minimum term, arguing that the 27-year hypothetical determinate sentence used to calculate it was manifestly excessive and involved double counting. The central issue was whether the rape and kidnapping had been assessed with proper regard to overlap, totality and the exceptional seriousness of the offending.

1. The appeal against sentence was dismissed. The 27-year hypothetical determinate sentence, producing a life sentence with a 12-year minimum term less time spent on remand, was not manifestly excessive and was just and proportionate to the overall offending.
2. The rape was properly placed in category 1A. Its seriousness was established by the extreme abduction, prolonged detention, violence, threats, psychological harm, significant planning, previous convictions, breach of a community order, ejaculation and use of a knife. Mental disorder was relevant mitigation.
3. Kidnapping has no applicable sentencing guideline, and its seriousness varies with the facts. Relevant considerations include the length and circumstances of detention, violence, weapons, effects on the victim and others, planning and victim vulnerability. Here the kidnapping involved high premeditation, lying in wait, a knife, dangerous driving and strangulation.
4. There was substantial overlap between the sentencing considerations for rape and kidnapping. The abduction and detention were central to the rape sentence, but the kidnapping went far beyond the restraint inherent in rape and involved distinct planning, weapon use and violence. The court could therefore treat rape as the lead offence while taking the kidnapping, dangerous driving and possession of a knife into account as aggravating context, together with the separate offence of assault by penetration.
5. The sentencing judge had recognised the need to avoid double counting. Given that rape sentences of 20 years or more may be appropriate in cases of such severity, a term well above 20 years was justified by the violent kidnapping, knife use, dangerous driving and other aggravating features.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): the appeal against the minimum term imposed by the Crown Court at Salisbury was dismissed. The court upheld the 12-year minimum term under section 323 of the Sentencing Act 2020, less time spent on remand.
• Crown Court at Salisbury: following guilty pleas, the appellant received concurrent life sentences for kidnapping and rape, with the minimum term fixed at 12 years, and concurrent sentences for the other offences.