SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing Sheriff Robert More made the following remarks in court:

"You were found guilty after trial of engaging in a course of abusive behaviour towards your former partner, that offence being aggravated by involving prejudice relating to race, colour, nationality, or ethnic or national origins. In returning that verdict, the jury made no deletions to the charge.

The offence was committed over a period of almost two years. It involved a wide variety of coercive, manipulative, and bullying conduct on your part. You also perpetrated a number of acts of significant personal violence against the complainer, which included causing her to strike her head against the floor rendering her unconscious, spitting in her face, and, on one occasion, seizing her by the throat and striking her head against a bannister.

The evidence at trial revealed that the relationship came to an end in June, 2024 following an incident which resulted in the complainer sustaining a fracture to her foot. Whilst you have continued to attribute this to the complainer’s own actions, the jury was satisfied that this was caused by you stamping on her.

The variety, and severity of the conduct involved in the commission of the offence, as well as the sustained period over which it continued, mean that the culpability involved in your criminality is very high.   

In relation to the harm caused, I have already referred to the fact that the complainer suffered severe physical injury as a result of the violence which you inflicted upon her.

In addition however, I have had regard to a victim impact statement which has been completed by the complainer in balanced and measured terms. Sadly, it is clear that the psychological damage done to the complainer as a result of your offending has been significant, and will be lasting. That she has been able to return to her job in what is a vitally important sector, is worthy of great commendation. The court also acknowledges the support which the complainer has received during her recovery from a number of agencies and, indeed, from her employers.

The seriousness of the offending in this case is such that, as I made clear to you at the time of the diet being adjourned, the imposition of imprisonment is appropriate.

It is evident from the information before me that throughout your adult life you have otherwise been a hard working man. You have yourself endured great personal loss in recent years. You have a daughter for whom you clearly care very deeply. It must be hoped that in due course you can return to employment, lead a pro-social life, and make a positive contribution in the lives of others.

With that said, I cannot identify any factors which would mitigate your offending itself. That you were intoxicated at times during its commission is no excuse, and of no mitigatory value. Whilst I acknowledge that the schedule of previous convictions tendered to the court discloses only two entries, the submission made on your behalf in relation to the issue of risk does not carry the weight which it might have had your offending in this case been restricted to an isolated occurrence.

Of particular relevance however, approximately three months prior to the start of the offending behaviour in this case, you had been made subject to a community payback order for the same statutory offence committed against a different partner, or ex-partner. 

Whilst the author of the justice social work report has not specifically identified the level of risk which you present to the public, or of being convicted again, that is always an assessment for the court. Given the nature of your offending in this case, as well as the fact that you have a conviction for the same offence in relation to another partner, in my opinion it is clear that the risk which you present to women in domestic relationships is very significant.

As you have not previously served a sentence of imprisonment, Parliament has provided that the court shall not sentence you to a period of imprisonment unless it considers that no appropriate alternative is available in the circumstances of the case.

Having assessed the culpability involved in your offending as very high, considerations of deterrence in your case are, in my opinion, paramount, and overwhelming. Accordingly, I have reached the view that there is no appropriate sentence available to me in your case except one of imprisonment. I do therefore pass such a sentence.

In determining how long that sentence ought to be, I am mindful that it should not exceed what is necessary to satisfy the purposes of sentencing.

Having regard to the aggravating and mitigating factors properly before me, the sentence which I impose is one of 3 years’ imprisonment which will run from 2^nd October, 2026 when you were first remanded in custody.

In addition, you will be made subject to a non-harassment order in terms of which you must not approach or contact, or attempt to approach or contact the complainer.

There will also be a condition of that order that you do not enter the street on which the entrance to the complainer’s property lies.

Finally, given the order’s protective purpose, I am satisfied that a condition should be imposed that you do not enter the area in Kirkcaldy specified by the Procurator Fiscal.

The duration of that order will be twenty years.

If you breach that order, that will constitute a separate criminal offence for which you could be prosecuted and punished."

23 October 2026