Antisocial behaviour – Kidnapping – Mitigation – Sentence length

R v Peter Graham Oswald: CA (Crim Div) (Lord Justice Gage, Mr Justice Treacy, Mr Justice Bean): 22 August 2008.

The appellant (O) appealed against a sentence of two years’ imprisonment and an antisocial behaviour order (ASBO) following his plea of guilty to the offence of kidnapping.

The victim (V) had lived with her mother in Rochdale. O had contacted V through a dating agency and, two weeks after they met, they began living together in another area. O told V that he had previously been convicted and imprisoned for raping his daughters and that he did not therefore want to be in a position where he had to care for children. V continued with the relationship and subsequently fell pregnant with twins. V and O discussed the future of the children and agreed that they would be put up for adoption. Before the birth, V moved back to her mother’s house in Rochdale. After the twins were born, V grew emotionally attached to them and decided that she did not want to leave Rochdale. O and V met and discussed the matter. V then got into O’s car under the impression that he would take her back to Rochdale. However, despite V’s protests, he drove down the motorway past Rochdale. They then stopped at a service station where V tried to get out of the car, but O accelerated and drove on. Throughout, O was crying and in a highly emotional state. O denied taking V against her will but then pleaded guilty on the day of the trial. A sentence of two years’ imprisonment was imposed, as well as an ASBO.

The conditions attached to the ASBO were that O was not to: (i) contact V directly or indirectly; (ii) enter Rochdale; (iii) join any introductions agency for ten years.

Held: (1) The offence was obviously serious, and although it was not a prolonged episode it would have been a terrifying experience for V.

The fact that O only pleaded guilty on the day of his trial meant that it gave rise to little discount. However, the court accepted that there was mitigation in the light of the unusual background to the case and O’s vulnerability. It was concluded that the sentence was longer than necessary and manifestly excessive.

The starting point for a sentence in the instant case was 21 months, and with a reduction the appropriate sentence was 18 months’ imprisonment, R v Spence (Clinton Everton) [1983] 5 Cr App R (S) 413 CA (Crim Div) considered. A term of 18 months was therefore substituted.

(2) With regard to the ASBO, the first condition was reasonable and necessary. However, the second and third conditions were neither necessary nor reasonable and were accordingly quashed.

Appeal allowed.

G Hoare for the appellant.