Abusers who strangle their partners are being given lenient punishments that fail to reflect the severity of their crimes, campaigners say, after an Observer analysis of cases prosecuted under a new law suggested inconsistencies in sentencing.
Violent offenders who committed attacks in front of children, threatened victims with knives or were convicted of multiple offences are among those spared jail in recent months, according to court records for England and Wales.
The cases were prosecuted under a new law brought in last June that made strangulation and suffocation specific offences in the Domestic Abuse Act. Before the new offences were created, strangulation was often treated as common assault, which carries a maximum six-month sentence. Those convicted under the new law can be jailed for up to five years.
The legal reforms were hailed by the government as providing better protection for women and girls, and hundreds of cases are understood to be going through the courts. But Observer analysis of outcomes suggests wide variation in punishments handed down in the first 11 months of the offences coming into force.
Some abusers convicted of non-fatal strangulation since the new offence was introduced have received immediate prison terms. In one case publicised by police, Connor Vickers, 25, from Northamptonshire was jailed for 18 months in October after admitting intentional strangulation and two counts of assault. In Chester last month, Stephen Hemming, 43, was jailed for two years after admitting intentional strangulation and assault by beating.
And in April, the court of appeal upheld a sentence handed to 20-year-old Alfie Cook, whose lawyers had argued that the 15-month custodial term he was given for strangling the mother of his child was too harsh. The judges said the term was “if anything, lenient”, even after taking into account his age and guilty plea, and said that “ordinarily” the sentence for non-fatal strangulation should be “one of immediate custody”, with a starting point of 18 months.
But some perpetrators have been given more lenient terms, including in cases where there were multiple offences or where children were present during the attacks. At Sheffield magistrates court in March, a repeat offender from Rotherham was spared prison after pleading guilty to strangling a woman three times in three months, as well as to two counts of assault and one of stalking. Some attacks occurred “in the presence of a child” but Corey Dixon, 25, was given a combined 20-week suspended sentence, drug rehab and sent on a relationships course, court records show.
At Burnley crown court in December, a man who pulled a knife on his ex-partner and strangled her for 10 to 15 seconds was given a 12-month suspended term, a restraining order and sent on a relationships course after admitting strangulation and assault. The court heard that the attack by Richard Lawrey, 22, was an “extremely frightening episode” that could have been fatal.
Others have been given community orders requiring them to complete unpaid work or rehab, without a suspended sentence.
At Mold magistrates court in January, Graham Jones, 35, from Flintshire was given 140 hours of unpaid work, a restraining order, and ordered to pay £199 by magistrates after admitting strangling his girlfriend of six years. He was also required to complete 35 days’ rehab and sent on a relationships course. The following month, David Higbee, 40, was ordered to pay £249 and told to complete a relationships course in the next two years after pleading guilty to two counts of intentional strangulation at Weymouth magistrates court, records show.
The variation in sentences has raised alarm among domestic abuse experts who said it suggested that some judges were failing to grasp the seriousness of the crime. Victims of strangulation can suffer brain damage, strokes, memory loss and psychological trauma and are seven times more likely to be killed by their partner in future, research suggests. Under the new law it is an either-way offence, meaning that cases can be transferred to the crown court if they are deemed too serious to be handled by magistrates, who cannot impose prison sentences longer than a year.
Lucy Hadley, head of policy at Women’s Aid, said she didn’t believe it was ever appropriate for those convicted of strangulation to be given community sentences, and that the handling of many cases by magistrates suggested it was being treated as a “low-level offence”. “It’s not just the message it sends. In some cases it is a matter of life and death whether a perpetrator is physically removed from offending,” she said. Dr Catherine White, medical director at the Institute for Addressing Strangulation, said the apparent marked variation in sentences was concerning, and questioned whether the dangerousness of strangulation was being appreciated.
“Strangulation is not the same as a slap or a kick or a punch. It’s not the same from the medical perspective and it’s certainly not the same from a psychological perspective,” she said. “The thought that you’re going to die, or there are children watching and thinking their mother is about to die ... the seriousness of that is enormous.”
Along with Refuge and the Centre for Women’s Justice, they are calling for mandatory specialist training for magistrates and judges and the urgent publication of specific guidelines for sentencing the new offences.
The sentencing council said it planned to publish guidelines in future but couldn’t give a timeline. In the meantime it said courts should refer to guidelines for comparable offences and the recent court of appeal judgment. The Magistrates Association said magistrates considered multiple factors when deciding sentences, which could lead to different outcomes. These include whether a guilty plea was entered, previous offending and the perpetrator’s age.
The association said the offences were new so it would “take a while before sentencing patterns settle down and become clearer”.
The Ministry of Justice said: “Independent judges decide sentences based on the facts of a case but our changes mean perpetrators now face up to five years in prison.” Nogah Ofer, solicitor at the Centre for Women’s Justice, said: “The whole point of the new offence is to understand how serious it is for the victim. We need to ensure sentencing reflects that.”
