SENTENCING STATEMENTS
A judge may decide to publish a statement after passing sentence on an offender in cases where there is particular public interest; where a case has legal significance; or where providing the reasons for the decision might assist public understanding.
Please note that statements may include graphic details of offences when it is necessary to fully explain the reasons behind a sentencing decision.
Follow us if you wish to receive alerts as soon as statements are published.
Once charges are spent, any statement in relation to them is removed and cannot be provided or acknowledged. Statements published before the launch of the website may be available on request. Please email judicialcomms@scotcourts.gov.uk.
The independence of the judiciary is essential to safeguard people’s rights under law - enabling judges to make decisions impartially based solely on evidence and law, without interference or influence from the government or politicians.
When deciding a sentence, a judge must deal with the offence that the offender has been convicted of, taking into account the unique circumstances of each particular case. The judge will carefully consider the facts that are presented to the Court by both the prosecution and by the defence.
For more information about how judges decide sentences; what sentences are available; and matters such as temporary release, see the independent Scottish Sentencing Council website.
Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.
HMA v Calvin Donnelly
Feb 27, 2025
On sentencing Lord Harrower made the following remarks in court:
"Calvin Donnelly, on 23 January 2025, at the High Court in Kilmarnock, you were found guilty of raping a 14-year-old girl to her injury. The offence occurred on 30 July 2022. At that time you would have been 16.
The incident took place in Mauchline Woods, Ayrshire. The complainer and some of her girlfriends had gathered near the woods to celebrate a birthday. They were in high spirits. Music was being played, and drink taken. After a while you and some other boys joined the group. You had been at the same school as the complainer and her friends, albeit from a different year and peer group. There appears to have been some sort of discussion in which the complainer asked you whether you would be prepared to “winch” one of her friends. However, the result of this was that you ended up kissing the complainer. She said she didn’t really want to kiss you, but she “wasn’t bothered” if she did. You led her further into the woods away from the others. The complainer described herself as being “OK” with what was happening, and wasn’t at that stage trying to get away.
Once there, however, you went a great deal further than she wanted to go. You bent the complainer over, pulled down her leggings, and penetrated her vagina with your penis. You didn’t ask her if that was OK, you just “put it in”. The complainer repeatedly told you to stop, and this became a scream when you penetrated her anus. You have suggested that this may have been an accident. The complainer denied this, saying that you had tried to penetrate her repeatedly. But it may not matter since, at the very least, any supposedly accidental penetration of her anus occurred during the course of unwanted, non-consensual, penetration of her vagina.
Only when the complainer said she would miss her bus, did she manage to get away. She pulled her leggings up, grabbed her mobile phone and ran to the bus stop. The CCTV evidence showed each of you arriving separately at Louden Street, where she re-joined her friends, in a state of distress. Upon examination, the complainer was found to have bruises and abrasions to her arms, legs, and back, as well as petechial haemorrhaging to her cervix, which the forensic medical examiner described as being more commonly associated with non-consensual than consensual sex. She also found swelling around her anus, consistent with penetration.
You will be 19 in 2 weeks’ time. You have two non-analogous previous convictions. The social worker has drawn my attention to a more recent conviction for a road traffic offence for which you received a community payback order. You have accepted responsibility for having sexual intercourse with a girl under 16, but you continue to deny raping the complainer. The social worker notes that you have had a number of adverse childhood experiences. You have a problem with alcohol. She has assessed you as presenting with a high risk of general re-offending, and a moderate to high risk of sexual re-offending, depending on the risk assessment tool used.
I am bound to take account of the Scottish Sentencing Council’s guideline for sentencing young people. The guideline states that the court should have regard to the intellectual and emotional maturity of the young person at the time the offence was committed, and that rehabilitation should be a primary consideration.
It goes without saying that an offence of this nature will have had a traumatic impact upon the complainer, both physically and psychologically. Having regard to your level of culpability and the degree of harm caused, I am satisfied that only a substantial custodial sentence would be appropriate, albeit your sentence requires to be less than would be imposed on an older person being sentenced for a similar offence.
I sentence you to a period of 4 years’ detention, backdated to 20 January 2025, when you were remanded in custody in relation to this offence. In addition, you will be subject to the notification provisions of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for an indefinite period. I will impose a non-harassment order such that you may not approach, contact or communicate with the complainer, or attempt to do so, for a period of 10 years."
27 February 2025