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 Stephen Harley

Aug 25, 2026

At the High Court in Glasgow, Lord Harrower imposed an extended sentence on Stephen Harley after the offender pled guilty to two charges of assault on different women aggravated by being in a relationship with them at the time. The custodial term was set at 70 months with a 3 years extension period.

On sentencing Lord Harrower made the following remarks in court:

" Stephen Harley, you have pleaded guilty on the second day of a trial diet to two charges of assault against different women, each aggravated by reason that they involved abuse of your partner or ex partner. The second offence was additionally aggravated by reason that it was committed while you were on bail.

The background to these assaults is as follows.

In the first incident, following an argument at a pub, you detained the first complainer in your flat, by locking the door and hiding the key. You also took her mobile phone, preventing her from contacting others. Over the course of several hours, you repeatedly punched, kicked, bit and strangled her, causing her to lose consciousness several times, all to her injury and the danger of her life. The complainer eventually managed to recover her phone and texted her sister, who contacted the police. In the second incident, which occurred two years later, you seized the second complainer by the neck to her injury.

In sentencing you, I must first assess culpability and harm.

The striking characteristic of both offences is that they involved your placing your hands around the complainer’s neck, a highly dangerous and all too frequent aspect of domestic abuse. The first assault, which only came to an end when the police arrived, was particularly nasty. The second assault took place in the complainer’s own home. The court was shown images of the injuries to both women. Each offence will have caused considerable harm to the complainers’ mental well-being.

Stephen Harley, you are now 36. I have taken account of everything said on your behalf by Mr McConnachie. Your record shows that you have offended on a consistent basis between 2010 and 2016, followed by a period of desistance, leaving aside your conviction in 2020 under the Misuse of Drugs Act. However, three of your previous convictions were for assault to injury, and two of these involved domestic aggravations. In her comprehensive and very helpful report, the social worker concludes that this recurring pattern of domestically abusive behaviour, over many years, involving multiple victims, has proved resistant to criminal justice intervention. She adds that, when considered alongside your history of alcohol misuse, poor emotional regulation, and difficulties managing conflict, there are significant concerns regarding your potential to cause serious physical and psychological harm to intimate partners. She has assessed you as presenting with a high risk of re-offending and in particular of causing serious harm within relationships. She recommends the imposition of some form of post-release supervision.

The sentence which I am going to impose is known as an extended sentence. It is in two parts. The first part of the sentence is the custodial part. Had I been sentencing you after trial, the custodial part in respect of both charges in cumulo would have been 78 months. Taking account of the timing of your plea, I will reduce that to 70 months, 5 months of which will be attributable to the domestic abuse aggravations, and 3 months to the bail aggravation. The second part is the extension period and will be for 3 years. During this period, you will be on licence and under supervision in the community. You will be subject to licence conditions fixed by the Scottish Ministers. If during the extension period you fail to comply with the conditions of your licence, it may be revoked and you may be returned to custody for a further period in respect of this indictment. The sentence will be backdated to 10 March 2025 when you were remanded in custody in relation to the second of these offences.

I will also make a non-harassment order such that you may not contact, approach or communicate with the complainer in charge 2, or attempt to contact, approach or communicate with her, either directly or indirectly, for an indefinite period. The complainer in charge 3 has asked for no such order to be made. Although her wishes are not determinative, in all the circumstances, I have decided to make no order in respect of her.