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.

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 Scott Howarth

Aug 19, 2026

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lord Braid imposed an extended sentence of 16 years and 3 months on Scott Howarth. The offender was convicted by a jury of charges against three women that include rape, assault and assault to the danger of life. Howarth will spend 13 years and 3 months in custody and a further 3 years on licence in the community. He has also been issued with non-harassment orders.

Lord Braid made the following comments in delivering sentence:

"Scott Howarth, you were convicted by the jury of five charges. Charge 1 is a charge of repeated rapes of your former partner, with whom you had sex on multiple occasions whether she consented or not, and against a background of violence, threats and drug misuse by both of you. Although that charge is not subject to any domestic abuse aggravation as such, it is clear that the rapes were committed in the course of an abusive relationship.

Charge 16 is one of assaulting a different complainer, a woman you had only just met, by kicking her on the body, and pushing her from a bed on to the floor.

Charges 17 and 20 are charges of assault of a different complainer again, another woman whom you had only just met although you had been communicating with her online for a period of months, and she had agreed to meet you, seemingly to buy drugs. In the first assault, you kicked her on her head. In relation to that assault, the jury clearly rejected your defence of self-defence. In the second assault, committed days later, you struck her to the head with your knee, struck her on the face and put your arm round her neck and squeezed, causing her to lose consciousness to the danger of her life.

Finally, charge 18 is a charge of raping that same complainer when you removed her lower clothing and had sexual intercourse with her against her will. Charges 17, 18 and 20 are all subject to a bail aggravation.

Victim statements have been produced by the complainer in charge 16, and the complainer in charges 17,18 and 20, although not by the complainer in charge 1. Each has been affected in her own way by your offending.

You have a lengthy record of previous convictions, stretching back nearly 20 years. Although it contains no previous sexual offences, it does reveal a history of offending aggravated by domestic abuse, and by breaches of bail, and it includes several assaults.

The Justice Social Work Report shows that you continue to deny the offences of rape, and take little responsibility for any of your offending. You have misused substances since childhood. You are assessed as being at Well Above Average risk of being convicted of a further sexual offence.

In approaching sentence, can I say at the outset that I am satisfied, having regard to the nature of your offending towards women, and the fact that you have been convicted both of sexual offences and of offences of violence, and in light of your record, that the ordinary conditions of release will be insufficient to protect the public from serious harm from you. I am therefore going to pass an extended sentence. This will be in two parts: a custodial element, and an extension period after your release from custody, during which you will be subject to a licence, the conditions of which will be set by the Scottish Ministers. Breach of any of these conditions will make you liable to be recalled to serve out the whole of the sentence in custody. I hope that you will take the opportunities this sentence will give you to address the issues which have contributed to your offending.

Turning to consider the length of that sentence, I must have regard to the Scottish Sentencing Council Rape Guideline, and also the more general guideline on the Principles and Purposes of Sentencing. Insofar as the latter is concerned, the purposes of sentencing in your case are punishment; protection of the public, and in particular, women; an expression of society’s disapproval of your appalling behaviour towards women; and rehabilitation. Insofar as the Rape Guideline is concerned, in relation to charge 1, I assess the degree of culpability as falling within level B having regard to the force which was used on occasion, the fact that the rapes occurred in the context of what you accept was an abusive relationship in which the complainer was vulnerable, and the repeated nature of the rapes. The harm falls within level 2. That suggests a range of 8 to 10 years custody. Had this been the only charge before me, I would have imposed a sentence of 9 years on that charge.

Turning to charge 18, the other rape charge, I assess it as culpability level B, and, on the information I have, level 3 harm. That suggests a range of 6 to 8 years custody. Had that been the only charge I would have selected a sentence of 7 years and 3 months imprisonment, 3 months of that being attributable to the bail aggravation.

The other serious charge, which brings the case into the High Court, is charge 20, the assault to danger of life. Had that charge stood alone, in light of your record I would have imposed a sentence of 4 years and 3 months imprisonment, 3 months being attributable to the bail aggravation.

Sight should not be lost of charges 16 and 17, which together would have merited a short sentence of six months imprisonment.

Adding those sentences together gives a total of 21 years imprisonment, which would be disproportionate, and unnecessary to achieve the sentencing aims which I have identified. I have come to the view that a proportionate cumulo custodial element of the extended sentence I am about to pass, that is, one covering all the charges on the indictment, is one of 13 years and 3 months imprisonment, 3 months being attributable to the bail aggravation. The extension period will be 3 years, and so the total length of the extended sentence I pass on you is 16 years and 3 months. I shall order that sentence to run from 19 April 2024.

You will be subject to the notification requirements of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for an indefinite period. Details of your conviction have already been passed to Scottish Ministers in terms of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007.

As regards non-harassment orders, given your propensity for offending towards women, I shall also make non-harassment orders in respect of each of the three complainers including that you shall not by any means, either directly or indirectly including by electronic means, or via social media, contact or attempt to contact any of them. This order will subsist for an indefinite period of time. I do not consider that a geographical restriction (as requested by the Crown) is necessary or proportionate."

19 August 2026