R v Sam Winter

Consecutive sentences may be imposed for offences arising from one episode where they are distinct in time, place or circumstance, particularly where they involve separate victims. A threat to kill may fall within a lower sentencing category where, in context, it was an empty threat and the intended victim did not hear or understand it. An attack on a police officer performing public duties remains a significant aggravating factor, but must be balanced against strong personal mitigation. Credit for a non-qualifying electronic curfew is discretionary and depends on the material circumstances, including the restrictions imposed and their duration. A sentence of 24 months or less may be suspended where rehabilitation is realistic, offending is isolated, risk is low, mitigation is strong and custody would severely affect dependent children, absent countervailing public-protection or compliance concerns.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Chelmsford Crown Court to affray, making a threat to kill and non-fatal strangulation arising from a series of incidents involving members of the public and police officers. On 27 November 2025, HHJ Sawyer imposed consecutive sentences totalling three years’ imprisonment.

The appellant appealed with leave. He challenged the categorisation and length of the sentences, the use of consecutive sentences, the credit for a non-qualifying electronic curfew, totality and the refusal to suspend the sentence. The central issues were the proper sentencing approach and whether the resulting sentence should be suspended.

The appeal was allowed in part. The sentence was reduced from three years’ imprisonment to 21 months and suspended for two years from the date of original sentence.

1. Consecutive sentences. The judge was entitled to impose consecutive sentences. Although the offences arose from the initial attack, the later incidents were distinct in time, place and circumstance and involved separate victims.
2. Threat to kill. The offence was properly placed in category 3B, rather than category 2B. The words used were serious and cowardly, but in context they were an empty threat. There was no evidence that the officer, who was unconscious or semi-conscious, heard or understood it. The appropriate term was six months before credit for the guilty plea, reduced to five months.
3. Non-fatal strangulation. The offence remained in category 2B. Attacking a police officer performing a public duty was a significant aggravating factor capable of supporting a substantial custodial sentence. That factor had to be balanced against the appellant’s remorse, primary caring responsibilities and stable employment. The court substituted a sentence of 13 months.
4. Non-qualifying curfew. The approach in R v Rice [2025] EWCA Crim 352 required a discretionary, non-mechanistic assessment of the material circumstances, including the relative restrictions and duration of the curfew. The judge had conducted a careful analysis, and the three-month adjustment was not inadequate.
5. Suspension. A suspended sentence was appropriate. There was a realistic prospect of rehabilitation, no pattern of offending, a very low risk of reoffending, strong personal mitigation and a severe impact on four dependent children. The appellant did not present a serious risk to others and there was no indication that he would fail to comply with court orders. The seriousness of attacks on law-enforcement officers did not require immediate custody in these particular circumstances.

The three-month sentence for affray was maintained. All three sentences remained consecutive. The suspended sentence was made subject to a requirement to complete 20 days of rehabilitation activity.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2026] EWCA Crim 359, the appeal was allowed in part. The total sentence was reduced to 21 months and suspended for two years, with a 20-day rehabilitation activity requirement.
• Chelmsford Crown Court: On 27 November 2025, HHJ Sawyer imposed consecutive sentences of three months for affray, nine months for making a threat to kill and two years for non-fatal strangulation, totalling three years’ imprisonment.