I’m so sorry, Twitter. I’ve been so absorbed in self-promotion that I have neglected my lawsplaining duties. As a peace offering, who fancies a deconstruction of this rubbish by the Mail? Anyone? Ok, let’s begin. [THREAD]
What has this barking mad judge gone and done? She’s delayed the sentence of a paedophile, which should have taken place last week, to May, to allow him to go on a holiday.
Only, that’s not quite true.
Only, that’s not quite true.
The defendant apparently pleaded guilty to attempting to encourage a child to engage in sexual activity. The involvement of “paedophile hunters” Dark Justice suggest the defendant was caught after engaging with an adult posing online as a child.
This guilty plea, we can learn from similar reports in the Sun and the Metro, was entered on 14 March. It is a safe assumption that this was a “Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing”. This is a defendant’s first appearance in the Crown Court, where he pleads guilty or not guilty.
Importantly therefore, this was *not* a sentence hearing. The defendant was not “due to find out if he would be put behind bars”. He was entering his plea. Why is this significant, you ask? Well...
In a serious sex case, such as this, it is rare that a court will sentence immediately. Usually the court will adjourn for a Pre-Sentence Report prepared by the Probation Service, making recommendations on the type of sentence and assessing the risk posed by the defendant.
A Pre-Sentence Report for a sex case takes time. It can’t be done the same day. Usually three to four weeks are required. And that’s not all. Often with grooming cases, the defendant will present with issues requiring a psychological or psychiatric report to help the court.
A psychiatric report usually takes at least 6 to 8 weeks to obtain, as the solicitors have to apply for legal aid to pay the psychiatrist, and the defendant has to be assessed and a report written, and this all takes time.
And what do you know? There was a psychiatric report required in this case! Tucked away there at the end of the article. Almost as if they were hiding it.
What this means is that there would always have been a “delay” or adjournment until May before the defendant was sentenced. This holiday is a complete red herring. The reason for the adjournment,
I can guarantee, will be because the court needed those reports.
I can guarantee, will be because the court needed those reports.
So how was the holiday raised? Well it seems, reading between the lines, that the date in May initially identified as a possible sentence date wasn’t suitable to the defence, and they asked for an extra week. The reason for this extra single week was that D had a booked holiday.
Now there is nothing unusual in barristers and judges negotiating dates for a sentence hearing to ensure that the date is convenient to all concerned - lawyers, defendants and victims. The court won’t allow a disproportionate delay, but 1 week is not much.
So in conclusion, the story is really: “Court adjourns sentence in serious case for psychiatric report for 8 weeks and agrees to push sentence back a further one week for the defendant’s convenience.”
The real anger here, when you break it down, is that a paedophile - a convicted criminal - is being treated with consideration by the courts. Nobody is being inconvenienced by this. No victim is having to wait longer for justice (because no victim exists).
But such is the nature of how we discuss criminal justice that we cannot contemplate the idea of a disturbed young man with learning difficulties being allowed to go to Cumbria with his family before being sentenced, possibly to prison. He must be treated as cruelly as possible.
Worse, those setting this agenda can’t even report the facts in their full contexts, so scared are the tabloids of having these discussions on their merits.
[ENDS]
[ENDS]
