Asan [2019] EWCA Crim 896

The offender was a special constable who had a brief relationship with AS, after they split AS resumed a more serious relationship with KM. Thereafter the offender engaged in a prolonged campaign of threatening conduct and harassment, continuing after arrest and whilst on bail.

The campaign started with damage to AS’s car with paint stripper, he also sent two letters purporting to be from an ex-girlfriend of KM referring to AS as a whore and making threats of violence. He was recognised on CCTV in respect of the damage and as the two families were friends an agreement not to contact the police was reached.
Further letters were then sent to AS and her family threatening violence, text messages were sent from “Zoe” saying people were out to get AS and targeting her family. Messages were sent to her father from another identity. On arrest the offender denied involvement and placed on police bail with a condition not to contact AS or her father.

The offender then carried out various actions in an attempt to mislead the police into believing hackers were planting evidence to incriminate him. This included an email sent to himself that he contrived to open in front of another special constable whilst feigning shock. Messages continued to be sent to AS’s father referring to the offender being hacked and making threats of sexual violence against AS.

The offender was arrested again and maintained his denials, following his release the messages continued and in a third interview he denied further offending. He pleaded guilty the day before the trial, but two days prior to that plea he had committed further offences, not known to the police at the time. In order to try and get around cell siting evidence he used some form of message delaying technology to send further threats to AS’s father and to his own father. The timing was said to be part of an elaborate plan to derail the imminent trial.

He pleaded not guilty to the new offences and wanted to consider an application to vacate his guilty pleas resulting in transfer of his representation order, the application was not pursued. He was then told on two occasions that if he changed his plea to guilty that a non-custodial sentence would be considered, but he maintained his not guilty pleas. He was convicted after trial of perverting the course of justice.

Both AS and her father submitted victim impact statements describing the significant impact of the offending on them and their family. The offender was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment suspended for 24 months with an unpaid work requirement of 180 hours.

“It is difficult to comprehend how the judge came to this conclusion. Nothing in his brief sentencing remarks enlightens us.” In particular, there was no mention of the Intimidatory Offences Definitive Guideline to which the judge was obliged to refer. The sentence was unduly lenient whether considered as an overall sentence or its individual parts. The offending was serious, persistent and sophisticated, meriting consecutive and immediate sentences of some length in their own right. The sentence was quashed and substituted with an overall sentence of 4 years and 9 months’ imprisonment.