Sentencing domestic murders: Schedule 21. By Allison Summers K.C.

Since 2024 four additional statutory aggravating factors have been added to paragraph 9 of Schedule 21 to the Sentencing Act 2020.

For murders committed on or after 29/02/2024 aggravating factors that may be relevant include where:

1. An offender has repeatedly or continuously engaged in behaviour towards the victim that was controlling or coercive and at the time of the behaviour, the offender and the victim were personally connected  (ba)
2. There was sustained and excessive violence towards the victim (fa)

For murders committed on or after 23/10/26:

• The fact that the murder was connected with the end of the offender’s intimate personal relationship with the victim, the victim intending to bring about the end of that intimate personal relationship, or a belief by the offender that the relationship had ended or that the victim intended to end the relationship (bb)
• The fact that the murder involved strangulation, suffocation, or asphyxiation (ca).

The additions followed recommendations made in the 2023 independent Domestic Homicide Sentencing Review[1], which sought to give domestic murders specialist consideration within the sentencing framework under Schedule 21.

In a recent domestic murder case in Portsmouth (R v J), the sentencing judge had to grapple with these factors. The defendant had strangled and suffocated his partner at their home in June 2024. The relationship was troubled; both the deceased and defendant had emotionally unstable personality disorders and other mental health issues that impacted the relationship. The defendant had at times undoubtedly had an overbearing influence on the relationship.

The prosecution invited the judge to find repeated controlling and coercive behaviour although no count of coercive and controlling behaviour had been included on the indictment and only limited evidence as to the relationship had been adduced. Further, notwithstanding the fact that the offence had been committed before the implementation of paragraph 9 (bb) and (ca) the court was invited to have regard to these factors as being “informative as to the change in approach in ‘domestic killings’.

The prosecution’s submissions to treat the background as one of coercive and controlling conduct was resisted on evidential grounds. As to whether the court should treat paragraphs (bb) and (ca) the defence submission was simply that parliament had not given these factors retrospective status. The judge found in favour of the defence, but this was no great defence sentencing victory.

Having regard to the 2018 Sentencing Council Guidelines, ‘Overarching Principles: Domestic Abuse’ it was not disputed that the “domestic context of the offending behaviour makes the offending more serious” [para.9]. Accordingly, it was accepted that the court was entitled to treat the fact that this offence was committed within the context of an intimate relationship and in Samantha Murphy’s own home where her children were to find her the next morning as an aggravating factor justifying an upward adjustment from the 15-year starting point.

I have no doubt that the inclusion of the additional aggravating factors within the Schedule reflects a genuine intention by Parliament to elevate or be seen to elevate, the seriousness with which domestic murders should be treated within the sentencing framework for murder.

However, whilst the purpose of Schedule 21 is to provide guidance as to the assessment of the seriousness of any particular murder, it also was designed to preserve  significant discretion for sentencers. Ultimately, judges are concerned with a fair assessment of the overall seriousness of the offending, and this is rarely achieved by a rigid totting up of every conceivable aggravating feature in the case.

It is often overlooked that the starting point of 15 years is not a neutral starting point. Within this starting point is a recognition by Parliament of the inherent culpability and harm of this type of offence. In this case a minimum term of 17 years properly reflected the gravity of the offending.

Allison Summers K.C. leading Adam Furze was instructed by Louise Rodaway, Wessex Solicitors.

[1].https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6411ce52d3bf7f79df1aa9c4/domestic-homicide-sentencing-review.pdf

About the Author

Allison Summers KC was called to the bar in 2000 and took Silk in 2020. She is ranked as a Leading Silk in Chambers UK Bar 2026 and Legal500 2026. Allison has a national defence-based practice, and specialises in cases involving homicide, other serious violence, and sexual offences. She appeared in the 2022 BBC documentary Sexsomnia: Case Closed? which looked at some of the legal issues relating to prosecuting and defending cases when sexsomnia was raised.

To instruct Allison, please contact the Practice Director, Chris Feathers, on 020 7404 1881