REGINA v TERENCE ANTHONY DYER
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE GREEN
- MR JUSTICE GOSS
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The applicant, convicted of sexual assaults, attempted rape, and other related offenses, sought to appeal his 19-year sentence comprising a 14-year custodial term and a 5-year extended period. Despite discrepancies in the probation officer’s risk assessment, the court upheld the dangerousness assessment used in sentencing. The court addressed and corrected the sentencing formulation to comply with legislative requirements, reaffirming the sentence structure and adjustments made.
J U D G M E N T
1. PRESIDENT OF THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION: Following a trial before His Honour Judge Lucas QC and a jury in the Crown Court at Guildford this applicant, who is now 50 years of age, was convicted unanimously of two offences of sexual assault and, by a majority, of attempted rape, two counts of sexual activity with a child, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity and sexual assault.
2. On 3rd July 2014 the learned judge imposed sentences which he articulated as follows: in relation to the first victim, for attempted rape, 10 years' imprisonment; for sexual activity with a child, 2 years' imprisonment consecutive; for inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, 3 years' imprisonment concurrent; for sexual activity with a child, 5 years' imprisonment concurrent; for sexual assault, 1 years' imprisonment concurrent. Sentences were also imposed for sexual assault with a second victim, 12 months' imprisonment consecutive to the terms imposed and for a further offence of sexual assault of a third victim, a further 12 months' imprisonment similarly consecutive to the other terms. In addition the judge purported to impose an extension period, that is to say an extended licence period, of 5 years. Ancillary orders were made pursuant to the Sexual Offences Act.
3. In short, as he made clear, the judge intended to impose a total term of 19 years comprising a custodial term of 14 years and an extension period of 5 years and this is how it was interpreted. As we shall explain, however, he subsequently realised that, as articulated, the sentence did not comply with the requirements of the legislation and he sought to vary it. The applicant now seeks leave to appeal against sentence; the application has been referred to the Full Court by the Registrar. We grant leave.
4. The circumstances can be summarised in brief. The complainant in relation to the five counts to which we have referred was a young teenager, J, whose family was known to the applicant. In 2005 the applicant took J on a golfing trip. They stayed in a hotel and the applicant plied him with a quantity of alcohol. During the course of the evening he stroked J in a sexual manner, removing his clothing and touching his penis with hands and mouth. He asked J to touch his penis although he refused.
5. When J was 15 the applicant took him on a World Cup trip. On that occasion again he touched J's penis with his hands and mouth, kissed him on the neck and stroked him in a sexual m