Sentencing adults for sexual offences committed in childhood
Sentencing adults for historic sexual offences committed in their childhood can often be a difficult and challenging sentencing exercise.
Inevitably, the Court will have regards to the Sentencing Children and Young People Guideline:
Sentencing Children and Young People – Sentencing
It’s imperative that the Court is reminded of both sections 6.45 and 6.46:
6.45 Only if the court is satisfied that the offence crosses the custody threshold, and that no other sentence is appropriate, the court may, as a preliminary consideration, consult the equivalent adult guideline in order to decide upon the appropriate length of the sentence.
6.46 When considering the relevant adult guideline, the court may feel it appropriate to apply a sentence broadly within the region of half to two thirds of the adult sentence for those aged 15 – 17 and allow a greater reduction for those aged under 15. This is only a rough guide and must not be applied mechanistically. In most cases when considering the appropriate reduction from the adult sentence the emotional and developmental age and maturity of the child or young person is of at least equal importance as their chronological age. This reduction should be applied before any reduction for a plea of guilty.
The above guideline should also be considered in conjunction with the Sentencing Council Guidelines for sentencing children and young persons for sexual offences:
Sexual offences – Sentencing children and young people – Sentencing
In terms of relevant caselaw, R v Ahmed and Others [2023] EWCA Crim 281 was recently endorsed in the case of R v AIZ [2025] EWCA Crim 349 and is vital reading regarding the ‘stepped approach’ to sentencing adults for offences committed in their childhood.
Briefly, at the age of 31, AIZ, was convicted of multiple sexual offences committed against his stepsister. AIZ was aged 11-15 at the time of his offending, his stepsister was aged 8-12. AIZ was sentenced to 5years’ imprisonment.
AIZ appealed, with leave of the single judge, on the grounds that 5year’s imprisonment was manifestly excessive. Also, the judge failed to consider the approach taken in Ahmed. In doing so, the judge failed to sufficiently adjust the starting point to reflect AIZ’s reduced culpability and age at the time of his offending.
The appeal against sentence was upheld and reduced to 3.5years’ imprisonment.
Their Lordships remarked, “This case is an example of how indispensable Ahmed is in difficult cases of this type, which has simplified and provided clear steps for judges at both first instance and on appeal to sentence appropriately in the very difficult exercise where adults fall to be sentenced for sexual offences against children, committed when the offender was himself a child”
The case of AIZ endorsed the approach applied in Ahmed emphasizing the importance of assessing both culpability and age at the time the offender offended.
Finally, R v Khan [2024] EWCA Crim 401 provides that culpability should be assessed at the age of a defendant’s offending and not on conviction, as an adult.
For further details: