Why do judges choose to impose consecutive sentences over concurrent ones?

“IN MY VIEW, this is an appropriate case in which to impose a significant consecutive element.”

Those were the words of Mr Justice Mícheál O’Higgins last week, before he sentenced paedophile swimming coach George Gibney for the sexual abuse of four girls dating back decades. 

The judge set a headline sentence of 12 years for the attempted rape of one girl in 1975. A sentence of six and a half years was then set for 39 counts of indecent assault.

Advertisement

He said the sentences would be served consecutively – meaning one starts when the other ends – given the number of counts, the number of victims, the extent of Gibney’s offending, the gross breach of trust involved and the significant and lasting effects of the abuse on the victims. 

After mitigation was taken into account, the final sentence imposed was 15 and a half years. 

In Ireland, judges have the discretion to give a person who has committed multiple offences consecutive sentences, concurrent sentences or a combination of both. 

A concurrent sentence is one where the offender serves all of their time together, where the total time spent in prison is equal to the length of the longest single sentence imposed, usually for the most serious offence. 

For example, if a judge gives someone a three-year sentence and a two-year sentence to run concurrently, that person will serve a total of three years.

Consecutive sentences are rarer than concurrent ones in the Irish judicial system, and are typically imposed in cases involving multiple offences and multiple victims. 

Dr Diarmuid Griffin, associate professor at the University of Galway’s School of Law, told The Journal that Ireland’s sentencing rules are developed from case law, as well as sentencing guidelines developed by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

Griffin said the judge’s main role is to ensure that a sentence is proportionate and reflects the gravity of the offending in a case. 

“Most of the time, they choose concurrent sentences. Consecutive sentences are often chosen in cases where there are multiple victims and involve multiple incidents over perhaps a prolonged period of time, and that can happen in very serious cases that deal with child sexual abuse,” he said. 

He pointed out that when a judge makes a decision about individual offences and decides to impose a concurrent sentence, they will look at the offending in total and may increase the sentence to reflect the severity of the offences committed. 

“When we have multiple offences being dealt with at the same sentencing hearing, and the outcome may be 15 years or more, it’s important to interpret that as reflecting the gravity of the offending as a whole, rather than just looking at it as a single sentence for a single offence.”

Ireland is one of a number of jurisdictions that impose concurrent sentences, which Griffin said works well in a case where there is a single offence. 

“The more difficult cases are cases of child sexual abuse, where the court is dealing with maybe multiple incidents that have occurred over a long period of time, and that may also involve multiple victims,” he said.

“That’s when consecutive sentences can become very challenging because there could be a large volume of offending, and it’s difficult to comply with the rules of sentencing while also reflecting the breadth and depth of offending in these very serious and egregious cases.”

He said in these instances, judges tend to impose consecutive sentences “to reflect the harm caused to each individual victim, and to make sure that the final outcome is reflective of sentencing policy and practice, so that the sentence is proportionate overall”. 

Griffin, whose teaching and research focus on sentencing and criminal justice, said it has become more evident in his research that consecutive sentences are being imposed in cases of child sexual abuse involving multiple victims. 

“It is particularly important for the courts to reflect consecutive sentences where there are multiple victims to reflect the harm caused to each individual victim,” he said.

“I think that’s really important, and the courts have emphasised that that’s an important approach to take in those particular circumstances.

“Ultimately, it’s at the discretion of the judge whether they impose concurrent or consecutive, but the outcome, whether it’s concurrent or consecutive, should be proportionate.”