Revenge Porn blackmail suspended sentence held too lenient by Court of Appeal

In Attorney General’s Reference (No.84 of 2015) sub nom R v Jamie Gabriel (2015) the Court of Appeal considered the appropriateness of a two-year prison sentence, suspended for 18 months, imposed for blackmail.

The Defendant Mr Gabriel had commenced an online relationship with the married victim, where they had shared intimate pictures, ultimately culminating in their meeting for consensual sex.  After the victim called off the affair, Mr Gabriel had threatened to share the intimate pictures that she had sent him (now a separate criminal offence contrary to section 33 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015).  Mr Gabriel demanded sums of money in return for him not sharing the pictures with her husband and neighbours.

The AG, on appeal, argued that the starting point of three and a half years for the original sentence was far too lenient and did not take into account the extent of the sustained campaign against the victim.  The victim was controlled by the offender to the extent that she emptied not only her own savings account, but those of her children also, alongside pawning her belongings to gain further funds.  It was also argued that a suspended sentence for blackmail is wrong in principle and that a discount of 30 per cent credit for the offender’s guilty plea was too generous.

The Court of Appeal held that the starting point for sentencing ought to have been four years’ imprisonment and only 25 per cent credit should have been given for an early guilty plea.  The original sentence given to the offender was quashed and replaced with an immediate custodial sentence of three years.

Click here to find out how Brett Wilson LLP can help you if you have been a victim of Revenge Porn.