The Queen v TT

The Crown appealed against the sentence imposed on the respondent, TT, for offences of indecent dealing with a child and gross indecency with a child. The appeal argued that the sentence was manifestly inadequate, particularly in light of the need for updated sentencing guidance for such offences, an issue last considered by the Court in 2009. The respondent's offending involved three distinct incidents with a child victim who was the daughter of his close friend.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the sentencing judge had erred in principle when imposing a total sentence of four years' imprisonment, suspended after 18 months, and whether this sentence was manifestly inadequate given the nature of the offences. The Crown contended that the Court should reconsider the sentencing standards for these crimes.

The Court dismissed the Crown's appeal, finding no error of principle in the sentencing judge's decision. It reiterated that there is no fixed tariff for sexual offences against children, and the appropriate sentence must be determined by the individual circumstances of the offending and the offender. While acknowledging the seriousness of such crimes and the community's increased awareness of their harmful effects, the Court found that the imposed sentence was proportionate to the totality of the respondent's offending and did not shock the public conscience or appear plainly unjust. The Court noted that the sentencing judge was entitled to exercise leniency, considering the respondent's lack of prior sexual offending since 2010, his community support, and meaningful employment, as well as a moderate prospect for reform.