May Minister for Justice launches academic analysis of sex offender sentencing

 Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration Jim O’Callaghan T.D. has formally launched a new book analysing sentencing in cases of serious sexual offences which explores the factors that influence the decision-making of judges.

 The research was carried out by Dr Diarmuid Griffin, a lecturer in criminology and criminal law at University of Galway’s School of Law and published by Policy Press - Sentencing Serious Sex Offenders – How Judges Decide When Discretion is Wide.

 The book uses more than 100 court cases in Ireland from 1985 to 2022, and examines sentencing resulting in 15 years' imprisonment up to, and including, life imprisonment in sexual offences cases. The research explores the factors that influence judges to impose a sentence of long-term imprisonment in serious sexual offence cases.

 Judges have made it clear that sentences of 15 years to life imprisonment are to be reserved for offending that is “truly egregious”.

Minster for Justice, Jim O’Callaghan T.D. said: ‘’Dr Griffin has produced very important data and analysis of sentencing patterns in relation to sexual offences, at the upper end. This research provides policy makers with a solid basis to develop policy into the future. Of particular note are Dr Griffin’s findings that show a significant level of consistency in sentencing which can be attributed, at least in part, to the fact that a relatively small number of judges deal with the most serious sexual offences in the Central Criminal Court. This is an important finding which challenges the narrative of inconsistency in sentencing, at least in relation to these offences, and shows the value of the experience gained over many years dealing with a particularly challenging category of offences. I am very pleased to launch ‘Sentencing Serious Sex Offenders: How Judges Decide when Discretion is Wide’ and I welcome its publication.”

 Dr Griffin said: “How and why judges decide to impose a particular sentence in an individual case has become a topic of intense public interest but there are few studies examining sentencing decision-making. This book provides an opportunity to broaden and deepen the discourse on sentencing.”

In their sentencing remarks, many judges stated that cases involving sentences of 15 years to life were the “most difficult” and “most horrendous” of their time on the bench, including one who described the offending as “the most grievous sexual assault I have ever come across in my career”.

Dr Griffin said: “These cases are exceptional in nature and judges pointed to the challenges that they present at sentencing. In particular, judges emphasised the severity of the consequences arising from the offending, resulting in victims being ‘severely traumatised’ and ‘seriously scarred’. 

“It is important to note that the findings set out in the analysis are indicative of the factors influencing a sentence of 15-years to life imprisonment and are therefore not necessarily reflective of patterns in sexual violence at a general level.”

 Dr Griffin’s data analysis indicates that there appears to be a broad consensus across decision-makers regarding the level of conduct, culpability and harm warranting a sentence in the top range.

 Some of the key factors that emerged from the analysis included:

• In almost all cases the defendant had been convicted of multiple offences (94 per cent). The volume of offending being dealt with at each sentencing hearing was the most significant factor that emerged.
• Half of all cases involved multiple victims of sexual violence and almost two thirds involved multiple incidents (63 per cent).
• The sentence imposed in these cases should be viewed as a reflection of the volume of offending in the case as a whole rather than a single sentence for a single crime.

Cases involving crimes committed against adult victims

• Of the 108 cases examined, 45 involved crimes committed against adult victims. The perpetrators were all men.
• All of the victims of sexual violence were women, and most were victimised in early adulthood. These offences were frequently committed in a public place and referred to by judges as a “random attack”.
• More than half of the cases involved serious levels of violence, including the use of weapons or the threat of their use (58%) and death threats (51%). Sentencing judges viewed these factors as significantly increasing the culpability of the defendant.
• In cases resulting in 15 years to life imprisonment, 65% of victims were attacked by a stranger and 18% by someone they met within 24 hours. This is in contrast with data on the experience of sexual violence in Ireland which indicates that the majority of adult victims knew the perpetrator, and this was often a partner, former partner, friend or acquaintance.

Dr Griffin said: “It may be that ‘stranger rape’ cases are reaching the sentencing courts on a more frequent basis than other relationship-based sexual violence and this may partly explain their prevalence in this study. It is also possible that when deliberating on sentencing outcomes, judges may be perceiving ‘stranger rape’ as being more serious and harmful.

“The level of harm caused to victims in all cases was referenced as critically important by sentencing judges, who referenced the physical and psychological impact of the offending and recognised the long-term effects of this type of victimisation.

 At a broader level, factors more directly related to the defendant were of significance in influencing sentencing outcomes, including:

• Of most importance was the previous criminal history of the offender, which was referenced by judges in two thirds of cases (67%).
• Three out of five of those with a previous criminal history had been convicted of sexual offences.
• Judges made reference to concerns in relation to the risk of reoffending in just over half of all cases (51%). These offenders were described as a ‘grave threat’ to the public. Aside from the entering of a guilty plea (56% of cases) the level of mitigation was limited.

 Cases involving crimes of child sexual abuse

 The analysis also looked at 63 cases of child sexual abuse, where judges were tasked with addressing the breadth, depth and depravity of offending at the sentencing hearing.

• While there were 63 defendants, these cases included a total of 159 victims of sexual violence.
• In over two thirds of these cases, victimisation began when the child or children were aged 10 or younger.
• There was more diversity in terms of the gender of victims of child sexual abuse when compared to cases involving adult victims - two thirds of the victims being female and a third male. All of the perpetrators were male.
• Multiple offences were committed in all cases and all cases included additional sexual offences. In some cases, the volume of offences committed was staggering, with one in six cases involving 50 offences or more.
• A highly significant aggravating factor in these cases was that the perpetrator abused a position of trust or misused a dominant position within a family. The perpetrator was either a father or step-father to the victim(s) in 45% of instances.
• Outside of this, in almost all cases there was some form of relationship with the child or the family members of the child, and the perpetrator breached that trust in the relationship.
• Judges emphasised the severity of the consequences arising from the offending, resulting in victims being “severely traumatised”.
• Aggravating factors relating to the level and extent of violence perpetrated against the victim(s) were identified by judges including, for example: special violence; additional and gratuitous sexual perversions; the use of death threats; and the use of implements of violence.
• Similar to cases involving adult victims, a guilty plea was the most prevalent mitigating factor (70% of cases). A victim impact statement was identified in 78% of cases.

Dr Griffin said: A previous criminal history was less prevalent than in cases involving adult victims (32% of cases). However, given the volume of offending, the number of victims and the prolonged and sustained nature of the abuse, it is more accurate to state that the offending did not come to the attention of the authorities at the time it was committed and, as a result, it was all being dealt with at the same sentencing hearing.

Dr Griffin said: The sexual offence cases that are the focus of this study are almost exclusively dealt with by a small group of judges that sit at the Central Criminal Court. In fact, sexual offences make up the majority of these judges’ sentencing workload. The small number of judges responsible for sentencing in these cases is an important component in shedding light on the consistency evident in sentencing approaches and outcomes.

Ends