R v Mansell
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE |
| Judgment Date | 10 February 1994 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1994] EWCA Crim J0210-12 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 93/1690/X2 |
| Date | 10 February 1994 |
[1994] EWCA Crim J0210-12
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION
Before: The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Taylor of Gosforth) Mr Justice Auld and Mr Justice Mitchell
No. 93/1690/X2
MR ROGER ATHERTON appeared on behalf of THE APPELLANT
Thursday 10 February 1994
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICEOn 17 December 1992, in the Crown Court at Knutsford, the appellant was convicted on three counts (counts 2 —4 of a first indictment) of indecent assault on a male person. Sentence was adjourned for reports. On 5 March 1993, he was sentenced to five years imprisonment on each count concurrently. There were other counts. On the first indictment, he was acquitted of indecent assault on a male (count 1); he was found not guilty by direction on counts 5 and 6 of similar offences. He pleaded not guilty to counts 1 —3 of the second indictment, which alleged gross indecency, and those counts were ordered to lie on the file on the usual terms. The appellant now appeals by leave of the Single Judge.
The nature of these assaults was that the appellant chose male persons between the ages of 18 and 22. By purporting to show them his skills in the martial arts, he engaged in physical contact with them and then proceeded sexually to assault them. Count 2 related to a youth called Flaherty who was aged 18. He and the appellant worked for the same employer at a leather shop. The victim was staying with the appellant at the time. Early in September 1991, the appellant visited the employer's house. He there talked to the victim about weight-lifting and offered to show him a grip from which it was impossible to escape. The victim was reluctant to engage in this exercise, but eventually agreed to do so. In the result, the two ended on the floor, the victim on his back and the appellant on top of him. The victim was unable to move his legs or arms which were completely trapped. He felt uncomfortable and uneasy. The appellant then began to make moaning sounds and the victim felt the appellant's penis through their clothes rubbing against him. The victim was angry at what had happened, and eventually the appellant released his grip. The third count related to a 20-year-old youth called Dwyer. He was a friend of the appellant's employer's son. Again early in September 1991, the appellant lured this victim into the leather shop on the pretext that they were going to have a cup of tea. He locked the shop behind them and told the victim to lie on the floor. After hesitation and some feeling of anxiety as to the appellant's manner, the victim conceded that he would. The appellant then laid on top of him and held his biceps with his hands. He began to make thrusting actions simulating sexual intercourse, rubbing his private parts against the victim's. The victim could feel the appellant's erection against his groin, but again, as in the first instance, both the appellant and the victim remained fully clothed. The appellant told the victim that he was gay. Eventually, the appellant unlocked the shop door and the victim was allowed to leave.
Count 4, which was the third incident, related to an older youth called McGill who was 22 years of age. The victim in this offence was casually acquainted with the appellant. On the morning of 5 December 1991, they met in the street. The appellant invited the victim for a cup of coffee. At the appellant's flat, they began to discuss Martial Arts. The appellant demonstrated some of his techniques. He pushed the victim to the floor and sat astride him. He then lay on top of him, causing the victim to be extremely anxious. The victim had the impression that the appellant was attempting to have sexual relations with him and struggled, but he was unable to get away. The appellant rubbed his private parts against those of the victim. Eventually, the victim managed to break away. He tried to leave the flat, but he was grabbed from behind by the appellant who pushed his private parts against the victim's bottom. Eventually, the victim broke free and was able to leave. On a later day, 17 December, the appellant approached the victim in the street and told him not to worry because he would look after him and give him money. The victim understood that this was an invitation to provide sexual services for reward.
On 30 January 1992, the appellant was arrested at his flat. There, the police discovered a number of photographs of young men and boys. In February, the three victims identified the appellant on an identification parade. The appellant was interviewed in January 1992 and again in June 1992. He accepted that he knew the victims, but denied the offences. He said that the stories that the three youths had told were fabrication. As already indicated, he pleaded not guilty, contested the case and therefore required the young men to give evidence against him. We have been told that when they gave evidence, the victims made it clear that they had been distressed and indeed still were distressed at what had happened to them.
The appellant had a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Fletcher (Andrew David)
...should usually be made, even in the worse cases, for a plea of guilty." 15 Lord Taylor also referred to an earlier decision of this Court in Mansell (1994) 15 Cr App R (S) 771 to this effect: the learned judge in each individual case has to try to balance the need to protect the public on t......
-
R (Giles) v Parole Board
... ... In Mansell [1994] 15 Cr App R 771 Lord Taylor CJ said at 775 that the judge— "in each individual case has to try to balance the need to protect the public on the one hand with the need to look at the totality of the sentence and to see that it is not out of all proportion to the nature ... ...
-
R v Briggs (Paul)
...bear a reasonable relationship to the offence for which it is being imposed." He then went on to quote from the judgment of this court in R v Mansell (1994) 15 Cr App R(S) 771, 775 as follows: "…. when one goes on to consider what would be the appropriate period to add, the learned judge ha......
-
R v Jones (Donan Langford)
...when judging the length of the longer than commensurate sentence to have regard to the proportionality. For example, in the case of R v Mansell, it was said on this occasion, by Lord Taylor CJ: "The learned judge in each individual case has to try to balance the need to protect the public o......