Appeal against severity of sentence is allowed

Criminal Law – appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of rape contrary to s.4 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act, 1990 and seven counts of sexual assault contrary to section 2 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act, 1990 – appellant was a first cousin of the victim – appellant six years older than the victim – marriage of their respective parents broken down – as a result, they spent time regularly in their grandparents’ home in a rural village – offending behaviour occurred during a four-year period between April 2004 and April 2008 – commenced when victim and appellant were 8 years old and 14 years old, respectively – offending conduct began with experimentation based on pornography the appellant had seen – victim’s father used to make appellant watch pornography on television from the age of 12 – assault began with touching the victim in different intimate places – victim gave evidence of a number of incidents which took place – the victim read her victim impact report – she stated that she previously enjoyed an innocent childhood but it all changed for her at the age of 8 – she said she felt dirty – she stated that the incidents had consumed her mind, her education was negatively impacted – she began self-harming at the age of 13, felt suicidal and unable to commit to serious relationships – an updated victim impact statement was furnished which was poignant – circumstances of the appellant were set out before the court – sentencing judge proceeded to sentencing and imposed a sentence of 8 years with the last year suspended – whether the headline sentence for s.4 rape offences was set too high at nine years – whether the appellant received a discount from the headline sentence which was too low – trial judge was in error in nominating a headline sentence such as could have been applied to such offending if it had been committed by a person who was an adult at the time - the range of discounts typically afforded for pleas of guilty in our courts ranges from about 15% to about 33.3 % and appellant was only afforded a discount of just under 13% – victim was ultimately spared the trauma of having to testify – reasonable credit for the fact of having pleaded guilty, albeit not as early as he might have done – cost and court time associated with trial was still spared – entering of a guilty plea indicated facing up by the appellant - favourable Governor’s report – based on existing sentence, appellant is due for release on the 14th July 2021 – appellant has spent 58.5 months in prison, or just under five years in prison – rather than quashing the existing sentence and formally substituting a new sentence, justice can be met by simply varying the existing sentence to suspend the unserved balance thereof with effect from 12 noon on Monday next, i.e. 8th March 2021 – suspension is subject to the same conditions imposed by court below – any necessary bond can be entered into before the Governor of Arbour Hill Prison.