A head sentence of nine and a half years' imprisonment for rape of a nine-year-old child, as part of concurrent sentences for 14 sexual offences against four child victims involving breach of trust, threats, and emotional blackmail, falls within the permissible sentencing range. Reference to contextual facts (including uncharged acts) in an agreed schedule of facts does not constitute sentencing on the basis of uncharged acts where the sentencing judge's remarks demonstrate understanding of the elements of the charged offence. A sentencing judge's observation that parole eligibility will be assessed by experts does not constitute a surrender of the judicial discretion to set a parole eligibility date.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.