![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Pittman, R. v [2009] EWCA Crim 72 (14 January 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/72.html Cite as: [2009] EWCA Crim 72 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
CRIMINAL DIVISION
The Strand London WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE BUTTERFIELD
and
MR JUSTICE PLENDER
____________________
R E G I N A | ||
- v - | ||
TERRENCE JOHN PITTMAN |
____________________
Wordwave International Ltd (a Merrill Communications Company)
190 Fleet Street, London EC4
Telephone 020-7421 4040
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
LORD JUSTICE KEENE: I will ask Mr Justice Plender to give the judgment of the court.
MR JUSTICE PLENDER:
".... I am sure you will re-offend if you have the chance, and believe that in doing so you will cause serious harm to other adolescent girls...."
In reaching that conclusion the judge considered, among other matters, the appellant's record, including his previous convictions for arson, burglary and theft, all of which were offences committed in connection with his sexual interest in adolescent girls and specifically in their underwear. He considered the effects of the appellant's conduct upon the girls in whom he showed a sexual interest. Although counsel emphasised that the appellant had not been involved in any physical assault on females, nevertheless the judge concluded that he posed a serious risk of harm, physical or psychological (and we emphasise "psychological").
"7.4 So, I come on to risk. Dr de Taranto [a consultant forensic psychiatrist] must be right that a long-standing condition, tied in with a non-curable developmental disorder is in some ways intractable. Whilst the Portman Clinic attempted and failed to extinguish [the appellant's] 'perversion', modern methods of sex offender management are designed to reduce offending behaviour and to make other psychological tendencies more manageable and lived with by the individual. In my view [the appellant] has never had any treatment or help which has taken into account the full nature of his disability and disorder. In a real sense he has not been given the chance which much more assaultive offenders are routinely given. There is little prospect of his getting that chance with imprisonment, for reasons I have given above. If any imprisonment were to be followed by a proper arrangement where the modern Multi Agency Risk Assessment schemes are designed to manage risk and support a satisfying non-offending life, then in my opinion there would be a fair prospect of success."
It is apparent from that passage that Dr Tully is far from saying that the appellant does not present a risk. On the contrary, he proposes a method by which the risk might be reduced and managed following the appellant's release from any period of imprisonment.
"Where a court sentences an offender to a term of imprisonment, it must direct that the number of days for which the offender was remanded in custody in connection with the offence is to count as time served by him as part of the sentence."
This court stated in R v Gordon [2007] Cr App R(S) 60, [2007] EWCA Crim 165, that no offender should serve a day longer than the period specified by the sentencing court. These principles must apply equally to the determination of the minimum term of imprisonment for public protection as they do to a standard term of imprisonment. Accordingly, the sentence of two years' imprisonment for public of protection under section 225 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 must be modified to read "two years, less 330 days".