Ian Leslie Bates [2019] EWCA Crim 1084

The appellant communicated with a dummy profile of a 13 year old girl set up by a group of ‘paedophile hunters”, and another for a 14 year old girl. When interviewed he accepted the communication and that he knew it was paedophile hunters and wanted to confront them.

In sentencing he was referred to as a predatory paedophile, the second contact taking place after he had been arrested for the first. The judge considered a suspended sentence but felt the offending was so serious he could not suspend. A total sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment was imposed.

On appeal no issue was taken with the length of that sentence rather that it should have been suspended to give the appellant the benefit of a course to address his offending. These were matters that the judge clearly had in mind, he took the view that appropriate punishment could only be achieved by a sentence of immediate imprisonment and there was no error of principle in his approach. The 15 year SOPO (as they then were) was disproportionate, and wrong in principle, and was reduced to 10 years.