Sentence 'unduly lenient'
Your support helps us to tell the story
As your White House correspondent, I ask the tough questions and seek the answers that matter.
Your support enables me to be in the room, pressing for transparency and accountability. Without your contributions, we wouldn't have the resources to challenge those in power.
Your donation makes it possible for us to keep doing this important work, keeping you informed every step of the way to the November election
Andrew Feinberg
White House Correspondent
First Edition
A husband, who had been given a suspended jail sentence last April for buggery offences against his wife over a six-year period, was sent to jail for four years by the Court of Appeal yesterday.
The judges, headed by the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Taylor, held that the original nine-month suspended sentence on the man - who cannot be named to protect his wife's identity - was 'unduly lenient'.
Lord Taylor, sitting with Mr Justice Hutchison and Mr Justice Holland, said the sentence had been such that, if upheld, public confidence in criminal justice could not be maintained.
The sentence had been challenged by David Paget, counsel for the Attorney General, Sir Nicholas Lyell QC. He described the suspended jail term on the 31-year-old husband, from Reading, as 'wholly inappropriate'.
The husband was not in court to hear the decision.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments