The Court of Appeal quashed a sentence imposed by the Circuit Criminal Court on an individual convicted of five counts of sexual assault against his granddaughter, ruling that the sentence was unduly lenient. The original trial judge had described the offending as 'medium to high' in gravity but imposed a headline sentence of five years with one year suspended, which the Court of Appeal found inconsistent with the judge's own characterisation of the seriousness of the offences. On resentencing, considering the gravity, multiplicity, breach of trust, and impact on the victim, as well as the lack of full remorse or mitigation, the Court imposed concurrent sentences of nine years' imprisonment on each count, backdated to the date the respondent first entered custody.
sexual assault – undue leniency – sentencing review – Court of Appeal (IECA) – sentencing guidelines – headline sentence – mitigation – breach of trust – victim impact – Criminal Justice Act 1993 – Probation and Welfare Service report – attempted penetration – remorse – concurrent sentences – resentencing