Intentional Strangulation – A Developing Approach to Sentence

This was introduced as part of a wide range of measures but was specifically targeted at increasing the seriousness of sentences for offences of strangulation which did not necessarily result in “really serious harm” or “ABH” type injuries.

It is committed when there is intentional strangulation i.e. the applying of force to the neck.

There are no sentencing guidelines for the offence, which is unusual. The Court of Appeal issued guidance in early 2023 in R v Cook [2023] EWCA Crim 452.

The Court made clear that the sentence of cases of this nature would inevitably be those which cross the custodial threshold. It was held that a custodial sentence will be appropriate save in exceptional circumstances. The starting point is 18 months custody.

There are additional factors set out in R v Cook which are said to increase the seriousness of the offence:

a)                 History of previous violence (the significance of the history will be greater when the previous violence has involved strangulation)

b)                 Presence of a child or children

c)                 Attack carried out in the victim’s home

d)                 Sustained or repeated strangulation

e)                 Use of ligature of equivalent

f)                  Abuse of power

g)                 Offender under influence of drink or drug

h)                 Offence on licence

i)                  Vulnerable victim

j)                  Steps taken to prevent the victim reporting an incident

k)                 Steps taken to prevent the victim obtaining assistance

There are also statutory aggravating features:

a)                 Previous convictions, having regard to (a) the nature of the offence to which the conviction relates, and its relevance to the current offence; and (b) the time that has elapsed since the conviction.

b)                 Offence committed whilst on bail.

c)                 Offence motivated by or demonstrating hostility based on any of the following characteristics, or presumed characteristics of the victim, disability, sexual orientation, or trans-gender identity.

The difficulty with the approach taken in R v Cook was that it was assumed that an immediate custodial sentence would the default sentence and there would only be a suspended sentence in exceptional circumstances. This would result in the Court of Appeal inviting those sentencing to ignore what are known as the imposition guidelines. These are the guidelines that are considered when deciding whether to impose a suspended sentence or an immediate prison sentence.

The offence of non-fatal strangulation was re-visited by the Court of Appeal in R v Borsodi [2023] EWCA Crim 899. There was clarification given in the case that although the starting point will be a custodial sentence (i.e. the offence crossing the custody threshold) this should not be interpreted as being an immediate custodial sentence.

The principle is that there will be an immediate custodial sentence ordinarily, rather than simply in exceptional circumstances. The Court of Appeal gave further guidance that those passing sentence must consider the imposition guidelines to determine whether an immediate custodial sentence should be imposed or a suspended sentence.