NO INCREASE IN JAIL TERM FOR ABUSER
The High Court has declined to increase the imprisonment term for a child abuser from Yorkshire, despite the Attorney General’s assertion that the sentence was excessively lenient.Steven Priestley, aged 47, was found guilty of eight counts of indecent assault and three counts of indecency with a child at Bradford Crown Court in March, leading to a 32-month prison sentence.
The crimes were committed by Priestley when he was a teenager, between 1989 and 1994, targeting two young boys.
Judge Jonathan Rose stated that a suitable sentence would have been 54 months but was reduced to 32 months due to Priestley’s age at the time of the offences.
During the sentencing hearing, Bradford Crown Court noted Priestley had no other serious convictions since 1994 and was considered “otherwise of good character.” However, the Attorney General’s office appealed, arguing in September that the sentence was “unduly lenient” and should have been substantially longer than 54 months.
Paul Jarvis, speaking for the Attorney General, argued that each count of indecent assault warranted a minimum of three years’ imprisonment under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, with the total sentence reflecting multiple offenses over several years against two victims.
The three High Court judges concurred that the sentence was within a reasonable range and did not warrant interference.
They also agreed that the original reduction was justified, as the judge considered Priestley’s teenage status at the time of the offences.
Some abuse took place after Priestley turned 18, notably in March 1993, but the most severe acts occurred earlier.
The judges highlighted several “mitigating factors” that influenced the sentencing outcome.
