News & Insights
Anna represented a client at Lewes Crown Court who had been convicted of five images offences. The police had obtained almost 1.5 million images on various devices in the client’s property dating back 19 years. Of these, 35,624 images were graded as indecent images of children (category A, B, and C), extreme pornographic images (bestiality), and prohibited images of children.
Anna drafted a detailed sentencing note setting out the client’s mitigation, making targeted reference to the Guideline on Sentencing Offenders with Mental Disorders, Developmental Disorders or Neurological Impairments. Despite the sentencing judge being minded to impose immediate custody, he was persuaded that the client could be better rehabilitated within the community and imposed 16 months imprisonment, suspended for 24 months.
Anna also argued against the imposition of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) with a contact prohibition. She referred to a line of authority which highlighted the need to avoid contact prohibitions for internet based offences. The prosecution strongly argued for the imposition of the prohibition. The judge was persuaded that the prohibition should not be included and the SHPO was amended.
Anna was instructed by Tim Stirmey of Cramp & Mullaney Solicitors.
Tom Edwards looks at the impact of the shift from Joint Enterprise to Common Purpose in the five years since…
Ben Hargreaves explores the inherent challenges in the admissibility of sexual history in sex cases. Section 41 of the Youth…
Silas Lee, pupil barrister, reviews the statutory regime on witness anonymity. Anonymous witness orders are most commonly sought by the…
An analysis of the law on fitness to plead and stand trial in the magistrates’ courts: Silas Lee reviews the…