R v Gregory Hagan

In sentencing for possession of indecent images of children, a substantial upward adjustment from the guideline starting point may be justified by the volume and gravity of category A material and multiple aggravating features. Good character and supportive personal circumstances may carry limited mitigating weight in such a case.

A custodial sentence should not be suspended where the scale and seriousness of the offending mean that appropriate punishment can only be achieved by immediate custody. That conclusion is determinative even if rehabilitation may otherwise be realistically available.

The applicant pleaded guilty in the Coventry Magistrates’ Court to three offences of making indecent photographs of a child contrary to section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978. He was committed to the Crown Court at Warwick for sentence.

On 23 May 2024, HHJ Campbell imposed concurrent sentences totalling 18 months’ immediate custody, together with a 10-year sexual harm prevention order. The applicant sought to appeal the sentence as manifestly excessive. He challenged both the uplift from the guideline starting point and the refusal to suspend the custodial term.

1. Appeal dismissed. The total sentence of 18 months’ immediate custody was not manifestly excessive and was well within the applicable guideline range.

2. The sentencing judge correctly began with the one-year guideline starting point for category A material. She was entitled to make a significant upward adjustment. The material comprised a very high volume of distressing category A images, including moving images of very young children and images showing pain or distress. The judge was also entitled to take account of the prolonged possession, deliberate searches for particularly serious material, the number of different victims, and the further category B and C images.

3. The applicant’s previous good character and favourable family references did not materially reduce the proper uplift required by those aggravating features. After allowing the full one-third credit for the early guilty plea, the 18-month term was appropriate. Concurrent sentences for the other categories did not offend the totality principle.

4. The refusal to suspend the sentence also accorded with the relevant sentencing guidelines. The judge was entitled to conclude that only immediate custody could achieve the appropriate punishment for offending of this scale. That conclusion was determinative even if the judge had been wrong to regard the prospects of rehabilitation as unrealistic. The applicant’s former caring responsibilities did not justify a different result, particularly because he could no longer act as carer for his vulnerable brother following the conviction.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — by judgment dated 18 July 2024, [2024] EWCA Crim 942, dismissed the applicant’s appeal against sentence.
• Crown Court at Warwick — on 23 May 2024, HHJ Campbell imposed concurrent sentences totalling 18 months’ immediate custody and made a 10-year sexual harm prevention order.
• Coventry Magistrates’ Court — on 27 March 2024, the applicant pleaded guilty to three offences and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence.