Name: Westminster Hall
Uploaded: 2026-10-19T15:30:00+00:00
Duration: 7004 s
Description: Westminster Hall debate: e-petition 764553 relating to sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling or coercive cases

15:28 - 16:16

Speaker 2

I beg to move the motion. That this House has considered e-petition 764553 relating to sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling or coercive cases. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Mundell. I would like to begin by thanking the petitioner, Hannah Shewan, for taking the time to write this petition, which has garnered over 105,000 signatures across the UK, which is a great achievement. The petition is titled "No sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling and coercive cases" and it goes on to say, "I want the government to introduce legislation so that a defendant charged with controlling or coercive behavior cannot receive a sentencing reduction for a guilty plea entered after initially pleading not guilty.

16:16 - 20:08

Speaker 3

This should be known as 'Alice's Law'. It goes on to say, "Victims of coercive control often wait months or years for trial, reliving trauma while preparing their victims' statements. Defendants may plead not guilty, then change to guilty at the last moment and still receive a reduced sentence. This can feel like continued abuse, prolonging distress and undermining justice. I believe late guilty pleas in these cases should not receive sentence reduction as it prolongs suffering, including the suffering I have personally experienced."

I used to be the chair of North Ayrshire Women's Aid, that's the local Women's Aid service in my constituency, and this is an issue which is deeply important to me. Coercive control is an insidious form of abuse which wears down, wears down a victim's self-confidence and freedom over a period of time, leaving the victim exploited and dependent on their abuser. Paris Shears, the petitioner, told me of her experience. Her ex-partner was charged with controlling and coercive behavior alongside other very serious offenses. Paris waited over 500 days for the trial, but her ex-partner changed his plea on the day of the trial.

He then received a sentence reduction and the charge of controlling and coercive behavior was no longer pursued. Since that day, Paris has dedicated her time to beginning and growing this petition as well as telling her story online and through the media, and she should be commended for how much time and effort she has selflessly put into this. Many women and some men go through situations like this and sadly many never leave.

Paris should be very proud of herself for not only getting out, but for raising awareness about coercive control. Hopefully the work that she has achieved with this petition could save other women from these kinds of dangerous situations. And what is most important in this debate and discussion is that survivor impact remains central. Going through a criminal trial can be a horrific and very difficult experience for victims who have to then relive their trauma in order to get justice and can be used by the abusers as another form of abuse towards the victim.

Currently section 76 of the Serious Crime Act of 2015 sets out controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship as having a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. Like the Sentencing Council guidelines for other offences, guilty pleas can result in a potential sentence reduction. This is in line with section 73 of the Sentencing Act of 2020 and the reduction in sentence for a guilty plea guideline. The principle of reducing a sentence for a guilty plea is long-standing in England and Wales and now set out in the legislation of the Sentencing Act 2020. The Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to issue a guilty plea guideline, the most recent of which was published in 2017 after a public consultation.

A usual reduction is one-third for a guilty plea indicated at the first stage of the proceedings, and this goes down to one-quarter for guilty pleas issued after the first stage.

The maximum reduction is one tenth when the plea is entered on the first day of the trial, and this could be decreased to zero for any pleas entered during the course of the trial. Courts are incentivized to reduce sentences for guilty pleas in order to encourage defendants who know they are guilty to plead guilty as early as possible. This can save the court time and money, as well as the victims from having to attend court and give evidence. However, it's important to note that Sir Brian Leveson conducted an independent review of the criminal courts which recommended that the maximum reduction should be increased to 40% when guilty pleas are made at the earliest opportunity. I will give way.

20:08 - 20:46

Speaker 4

I'm very grateful to the honorable lady for giving way and for setting out a very clear case. One of my constituents contacted me because she had been the victim of coercive control and domestic abuse and was set to wait up to two years for the court case to come forward.

Because her former partner had entered a not guilty verdict, there were still proceedings in the family court where there was no treatment acknowledged because of that situation. Would the honorable lady agree with me that this is a matter of real concern that delays in the criminal justice system allow potential abusers to continue to exercise their coercive control through the family courts and it would be important for the government to look closely at how to address this matter as well?