01482 778 463

We're here to help 01482 778 463

CLAIM ONLINE
Hudgell Solicitors™ | Latest News | Myles Bradbury case – why we welcomed restructuring of sentence to protect public

Myles Bradbury case – why we welcomed restructuring of sentence to protect public

Myles Bradbury


By Renu Daly, clinical negligence solicitor

What makes for an appropriate punishment for somebody who took advantage of their position of trust as a respected children’s doctor to sexually abuse 18 young boys in his care for a number of years?

Initially, Judge Gareth Hawkesworth decided it should be a total of 22 years when sentencing Cambridgeshire doctor Myles Bradbury last December, following four-and-a-half years of offending in his specialist role at Addenbrooke’s Hospital.

The judge at the time said he had never come across a ‘more culpable or grave course of sexual criminality which had involved such a gross and grotesque breach and betrayal of the Hippocratic oath’ – handing out the severe sentence which was welcomed by victims and their families.

However, following an appeal by Bradbury against the sentence, a panel of three Court of Appeal Judges this week made the decision to ‘restructure’ the sentence, replacing it with a custodial element of 16 years, with an additional six years on licence.

This move was the cue for inaccurate headlines across the national media about Bradbury winning a ‘six year cut in sentence’.

Of course, it resulted in immediate calls to myself from journalists seeking the families of victims – a large number of whom we represent – looking for comments of outrage and disappointment.

As we stressed in our statement following the appeal hearing, yes, families were disappointed and angry that Bradbury even had the nerve to sit in a court room and appeal. He has not shown any remorse and had already put their families, and the gravely ill young boys through suffering from which many may not recover psychologically.

As lawyers representing these vulnerable victims, it is our place to ensure we fully explain the law, in plain English to our clients, so they fully understand what has happened.

We also feel it is important the wider public fully understand the decision made, and in this case, the ‘restructuring’ of Bradbury’s sentence was something we welcomed.

Previously, Bradbury had a determinate sentence, which is for a fixed length of time. Where the sentence is of 12 months or more, the offender spends the first half of the sentence in prison and the second half in the community ‘on licence’.

Under the previous statutory sentence, Bradbury would have served half his 22 year sentence – 11 years – before he would have been ‘eligible’ for release back into the community. He would have remained on licence for the remaining 11 years of the initial sentence, and would be immediately returned to prison should he offend again.

However, a sentence should always be about best protecting the public, and effectively, under the initial sentence, the threat of re-offending could have still have been very significant when Bradbury reached his 11 years term, and was able to walk free.

The Court of Appeal restructured the sentence to an ‘indeterminate’ 16-year sentence, with six years on licence.

With an ‘indeterminate’ prison sentence, there is no date is set when the person will be released.

They have to spend a minimum amount of time in prison (called a ‘tariff’) before they’re considered for release, with The Parole Board responsible for deciding if someone can be released.

Indeterminate sentences are given if a court thinks an offender is a danger to the public, and by sentencing him in this way, Bradbury’s character and behaviour will be under constant scrutiny.

He will serve two-thirds of the sentence – 10 years and 8 months – before importantly he is not ‘eligible’ `for release, but only ‘considered’ for release on licence, and here lies the key difference between the two sentences, as it provides greater protection to the public.

It means the courts have recognised this is a man who, after serving 11 years, may not have changed at all. He may have served his sentence, but he could remain a major threat to young children and could be highly likely to reoffend. If that were to be the case, his sentence would have done no good at all.

Under the ‘indeterminate sentence’, he will be assessed thoroughly, with his behaviour, his remorsefulness and his mental state closely assessed.

Under this system, the public will simply be much better protected.

If it is considered at the time that he is of any danger to the public, and young children in particular, he will remain in prison for the rest of his sentence – and if still a danger, his sentence could be amended again accordingly.

Under this approach, Bradbury won’t be released at all if still considered a threat, and that has to be the key consideration at all times.

No Comments

Leave a Reply

*Required

The Author

author image

Renu Daly

Solicitor, Clinical Negligence

rd@hudgellsolicitors.co.uk

Request a callback

Request a callback from a solicitor

 I am an existing client.









What Our Clients Think

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Claim against Met Police

"Apart from when purchasing property, I have virtually no experience of working with solicitors. I… "

Mr Ray Dickinson

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Excellent service

"Excellent service"

Mr Kevin Daniel Hughes

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Extremely professional

"Extremely professional and considerate staff. Helpful every step,and always contactable."

Mrs Naomi Walsh

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

mrPAWEL MADRY

"VERY GOOD SOLICITORS.THANK YOU/I RECOMMEND"

Mr Pawel Madry

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

An excellent company to deal with

"An excellent company to deal with. Very efficient & professional with a personal touch. Kept… "

Myra Phillips

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Very good communication between myself …

"Very good communication between myself and Hudgell resulting in a very satisfactory outcome"

Mrs Judith Kirkpatrick

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Very good and friendly people

"Very good and friendly people"

Mr Nisar Ahmad Ahmadi

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Excellent advice throughout

"Excellent advice throughout, kept up to date at all times, Would highly recommended"

Alan Beaumont

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

very helpful from the start

"very helpful from the start. Kept in touch to keep me up to date with… "

Miss Felicity Warrack

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

A solicitor that listens and doesn't judge.

"I hope I never have to go through anything like it again but if I… "

Linda Nicholson

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Thank you for your support especially …Jade

"Thank you for your support especially by Jade again you for understanding my case. Graham… "

Mr Graham Eccles

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Renu could not have been …

"Renu could not have been better,excellent service"

Mrs Jane Jones

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Professional first class company

"Professional first class company"

Mr Davies

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Before instructing Hudgells we couldn't …

"Before instructing Hudgells we couldn't even extract an apology from the defendant so to come… "

Joanne

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Great service

"fr endless staff made the process easy, great communication throughout. Would recommend."

Jimmy

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Amy Wilkinson has been very profession …and

"Amy Wilkinson has been very professional and patient with my enquiries also very helpful, so… "

Sharan Hatch

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Happy Chappy.

"I was kept up to date with any changes, treated with respect and honesty and… "

James

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

Excellent service

"Professional and officiant at all times. Communicating regularly and prompt replying. Highly recommend, will definitely… "

Mrs Iwona Tovar

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

I would recommend this company to …

"I would recommend this company to anyone very helpful and quick they kept me up… "

Mrs Clare Kett

Rated 9.2 out of 10 based on 332 reviews

Powered by Trustpilot

© 2017 Hudgell Solicitors®. All Rights Reserved.

Hudgell Solicitors is a trading name of Neil Hudgell Limited | Director Dr. Neil Hudgell MA LLB (Hons) LLD | Registered in England No. 7078429 | Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority | SRA No. 521372 | VAT Registration No. 254 7802 90