His decision to reject an appeal for a heavier sentence for a man who murdered a woman in a sexual act was called “ultimate victim accusation.”
In September of this year, 32-year-old Sam Pybus was sentenced to four years and eight months in prison. He was previously sentenced to pressure on her neck when having sex at Sophie Moss’s home and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Sentenced to four years and eight months in prison. Darlington In the early morning of February 7th.
The sentencing judge accepted that the married Pipers accidentally killed the mother of two children, and his remorse was real.
On Friday, the Court of Appeal rejected the appeal to increase his sentence.
Labour Party Member Harriet Harman Said that the ruling was “unfair, unfair to Sophie, and Pybus was not held accountable”.
She added: “This confirms why we have to enact a new law to ensure that men who claim wrongful defense of rough sex are prosecuted and sentenced to life imprisonment for sexual murder.
“This is the ultimate victim’s accusation and the ultimate male excuse for domestic violence.”
Women’s Center justice Said the case showed that Sophie was “partly responsible for her death.”
Ms. Harman has been the main advocate for the abolition of brutal defenses. After she wrote to the Attorney General complaining about his “excessive lenient” sentence, Pybus’s case was submitted to the Court of Appeal.
In 2019, she told Commons Men “actually escape murder by using rough sexual defenses.”
On Friday, the Court of Appeal heard a statement from Attorney General Suella Braverman QC, who stated that Sophie could not agree to any actions after losing consciousness and that the risks should be “obvious to Pybus”.
She said: “Sophie Moss cannot and will not agree to be strangled outside of consciousness.
“In order for Sophie Moss to die at the hands of the criminal, he has to strangle her to the point of unconsciousness or even further.
“She will no longer be an active participant in the behavior that criminals claim she is enjoying.”
Sam Green QC of Pybus stated that there is no evidence of how long he strangled Ms. Moss, adding: “We don’t know when to lose consciousness.”
Justice Markur sits with Justice Carl and Mr Justice Murray Rejected the Attorney General’s request to submit a verdict.
Ms. Markur said: “We are based on the facts and evidence in this case rather than guesses… we found that the judge’s assessment did not contain unreasonable or unjustified legal errors.”
“We do not accept the opinion of the Attorney General that the judge made a mistake when considering the starting point of this case as one of six years,” she continued.
Justice Markur agreed with the sentencing judge’s opinion that “the nature of the evidence is that it is impossible to expect the jury to convict this criminal of murder”, and there is no evidence that Pybus intends to kill or cause real murder. Caused serious injury to Ms. Moss.
The judge also added that the evidence showed that Ms. Moss agreed to the practice of pornographic suffocation.
“Evidence in court shows that evidence that has nothing to do with the perpetrator shows that her participation in this practice was voluntary and was initiated by her,” Justice Markur said, adding that her consent was not sufficient as a manslaughter. defend.
Justice Markur stated that Ms. Moss’ death “has a huge loss for those who love her.”
The judge concluded: “Considering all the circumstances of this case, we do not believe that the judge was wrong in classification, and the promotion he applied for was wrong…because he pleaded guilty.”
The Women’s Justice Center stated that the Pybus case “shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of male violent crime”.
Director Harriet Wilstrich said: “Unfortunately, the Attorney General must accept cases brought by prosecutors in lower courts, especially Sophie Moss’enjoy suffocation’.
“This is a form of accusing the victim, showing that she was partly responsible for her death.”
Pybus’s ex-wife Louise Hewitt also criticized the ruling, saying it proves that “rough sexual defense is effective, even though the Domestic Abuse Act should repeal it.”
The Domestic Abuse Act became law in April this year.
Article 72 of the law stipulates that a person cannot agree to cause serious harm in order to obtain sexual gratification or, by extension, their own death.
This means that if the defendant claims that the death of the victim or the injury they suffered was the result of a “rough sexual error”, they will still be prosecuted for the relevant crime.
Ms. Hewitt said that Pybus’s verdict “does not reflect the life of grief suffered by Sophie’s family, especially her two sons, who had to grow up in the narrative about their mother”.
She said: “I think this is a very loose sentence. It puts the blame on Sophie. For me, this is to blame the victim. This should not be allowed to happen.”
