In our previous blog, we explained the offence of Perverting the Course of Justice (PCOJ) and demonstrated how easy it can be to fall within the broad definition of this offence, with an act that may seem a trivial “white lie” at the time but places you at serious risk of being landed behind bars.
The maximum sentence for this offence is life imprisonment. This remains the case, and that sentence is still reserved for the rarest and most serious instances. However, outside of that, it was a challenge to offer clients detailed advice about sentencing because no sentencing guidelines existed.
The offence of Perverting the Course of Justice ranges from being dishonest with the police (for example, if asked about a person’s whereabouts) to serious interference with justice, such as planting evidence, making false allegations and jury tampering.
From the 1st October 2023, new guidelines are being introduced which will provide clarity on sentencing with this particularly murky offence. These guidelines intend to place the possible sentences into an easy-to-use table, listing the likely factors and circumstances that will increase or decrease the severity. We explain these guidelines below:
There will be three categories determined by the “harm” caused. Harm is determined by examination of the facts and an analysis of the effect of the offence. Suggestions have been made of factors that would make an offence more likely to fall into each category:
Harm
Category 1:
- Serious consequences for an innocent party(ies) as a result of the offence (for example time spent in custody/arrest)
- Serious distress caused to innocent party (for example loss of reputation)
- Serious impact on the administration of justice
- Substantial delay caused to the course of justice
Category 2:
- Suspicion cast upon an innocent party as a result of the offence
- Some distress caused to an innocent party
- Some impact on the administration of justice
- Some delay has been caused to the course of justice
Category 3:
- The offence had limited effects.
Each category is split into three sub-categories, labelled A, B and C, based on “culpability”. Culpability is determined by analysis of the commission of the offence, the motivations and the seriousness of the offence that it was linked to. Several suggested demonstrations of high, medium and low culpability have also been listed:
Culpability
A – High culpability:
- Conduct over a sustained period of time
- Sophisticated and/or planned nature of conduct
- Underlying offence is very serious
B – Medium culpability:
Cases that fall between categories A and C because:
- Factors are present in A and C which balance each other out and/or;
- The offender’s culpability falls between the factors described in A and C
C – Low culpability:
- Unplanned and/or limited in scope and duration
- Unsophisticated nature of conduct
- The underlying offence was not serious
- Involved through coercion, intimidation or exploitation
- Offender’s responsibility substantially reduced by a mental disorder or learning disability
Case Study Example
The defendant lied about an aspect of a minor offence in an attempt to divert police suspicion, and this lie was clearly pre-planned.
They would likely fall in the middle-Category B culpability.
If this lie caused a delay to the administration of justice and/or some distress to another party but did not cause prolonged distress or reputational damage, that defendant would likely fall into category 2B.
If we then refer to the above table the starting point for the sentence for an offence in that category is 1 year’s custody (prison).
Prison Is Not The Only Option
The range of sentence does include a possible community order but it appears that a very specific set of circumstances would be needed for an offence to fall into category 3C.
The highest sentence outlined in the guidelines is 7 years’ custody. However, this is not the maximum sentence possible. These are just guidelines and the court can go far above 7 years’ custody if they feel that the facts were particularly worthy of a longer sentence. It is also important to note that if convicted of Perverting the Course of Justice there may also be a conviction and sentence for the original crime that it related to.
A conviction for Perverting the Course of Justice very rarely comes without a prison sentence. However, England an Wales are facing a major problem with overcrowding at present. The Guardian Newspaper reported in August 2023:
“The chief inspector of prisons, the Tory chair of the justice committee and senior prison staff all warned that the findings had been fuelled by overcrowding. The prison population stands at 86,763, with just 947 empty cells in England and Wales. However, insiders said that the supposedly “spare” cells were often in the wrong places or inappropriate for incoming prisoners.”
The problem with overcrowding in prisons and professionally prepared and presented mitigation could be the difference between a prison sentence being imposed or not.
