Pleaded Guilty To Dv Abh, Likely Sentence For First Offender

[distressednicegu]

I'm a male and I’ve pleaded guilty to ABH in DV scenario. The injury caused to my wife is a minor cut on the forehead, which was healed next day without any medical required. There is a long story about how I have been used and pushed in the circumstances leading to the incident but I had to plead guilty to avoid ongoing trauma that this case had brought to me. Magistrate judge asked for a pre-sentence report before the sentencing hearing. There are lots of exaggerated versions and white lies in my partner’s statement, some of which I denied during my interview with PO.
Some key points:
> During the first hearing, and after I pleaded guilty, Prosecution read the case summary and said they think it’s an ABH category 2 offence. To which Judge replied and said, “in your opinion”.
> My solicitor pointed a minor injury to the judge, which judge agreed to. My solicitor then said, “I believe this court can sentence this court, it doesn’t need to go to crown court”.
> My solicitor during my conversation with her thinks it’s on the boundary of category 3 to category 2. A judge could give me the custodial sentence, but a community order is likely. It’s my first offence and I have good character record otherwise.
> My PO officer said to me, don’t be worried you are not going to prison.
> She noted that she has found me very remorseful.
> She discussed a programme with me, which I can benefit from as part of rehabilitation. She said, the judge will likely give some non-paid work or fine as a punitive punishment too, but, as it’s in addition to a programme, it’ll be less than usual.
> I asked her 2-3 questions about the programme. And also mentioned why I think my partner has said exaggerated version to use me for Visa.
> She took note of everything. She said while finishing the meeting, she will discuss with her colleague, if I can be offered the programme or not.

Queries to experienced judges/barristers/solicitors on this forum:
> what is the sentence I'm likely to receive from Judge? Am I looking at any chance of custodial sentence, even suspended?
> Why did PO change her mind and said she will have to discuss the suitability of programme with her colleague? I'm likely to receive larger unpaid work I guess if they don’t offer the programme. Do I have an opportunity to contact her via my solicitor before hearing, and, convey that I'm willing to take the programme as It gives me an opportunity to learn something at least then a lot of non-paid work?
> Are PO/Judge likely to add something like curfew as well during sentencing? I have no history of any issues drugs/alcohol abuse.

[Buenchico]

See pages 201 to 204 here:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Sept-2015-MCSG-pdf1.pdf

Based upon having done a bit of court reporting myself, and having read thousands of court reports in the press, I'd be amazed if anything other than a Community Order was the sentence in your case.

[distressednicegu]

Thanks Buenchico!

I can see from some of your other answers on your forum, you have decent experience in understanding the "harm", "culpability" and potential "categories". What category do you think my sentencing is going to fall under. My wife has also stated that I strangled her and slapped her number of times.

Any suggestions for how my solicitor/barrister can help with mitigating it to keep it under category 3 and not category 2. As Is said earlier, prosceution desires it to be under Cat 3. And my solicitor thinks it's between Cat 3 and Cat 2.

Injury caused is very minor, and not inline with how exaggerayely my wife describes in her statement. however I worry, that her Victim Impact Statement is going to be exaggerated as well.

Im hoping my solictor can defend well and get the judges to believe it should be categorised under Cat 3. However my Solicitor is playing coy and not giving me any assurance.

[Buenchico]

Based upon what you've written, 'harm' will definitely fall into the 'lower' classification. 'Culpability' might be borderline but the exact decision between 'higher' and 'lower' is probably irrelevant. If the magistrates (or a judge) see the offence as on the borderline between 'Category 3' and 'Category 2' then, with a guilty plea for a first-time offender, there's not a moggy-in-Hades chance of you being sent to prison.

[atalanta]

Why would your wife lie or exaggerate ? Have you given her cause ?

[New Judge]

"Any suggestions for how my solicitor/barrister can help with mitigating it to keep it under category 3 and not category 2."

I don't wish to be unkind but if your solicitor or barrister cannot do that without help from some well-intentioned (bot often well informed)amateurs who are armed with only the briefest of details, I would ask for my money back (unless you're on Legal Aid, of course).

[Peter Pedant]

NJ I think the users are using this as a free second opinion service

when I was screwed for drink driving a hang-around on the day defender said to me - "90! that is three times over the limit ! without me there is a chance you will go to prison !"

and I said it is blood and not breath and is 5 over limit

and he said Oh! -
and since then I have tried to give advice as best I can to punters on this thread

[New Judge]

I tend to agree (about the free second opinion) Peter. But it is clear that the OP’s case is well advanced and that professional legal advice has been available. Furthermore he has had an interview with the Probation service and is about to face sentencing. His latest question relates to the "Categorisation” of the offence’s seriousness. This should actually have already been determined by the Bench that ordered the probation report (if they had been properly directed by their Legal Advisor) if for no other reason than to inform the probation service what level of sentence they had in mind. The time to make representations about that categorisation was at the earlier hearing and unless any significant extra detail comes out of the probation report (which it should not because the probation service should not concern itself with the issue of seriousness) then the sentencing bench must work on that earlier categorisation.