SENTENCING STATEMENTS
A judge may decide to publish a statement after passing sentence on an offender in cases where there is particular public interest; where a case has legal significance; or where providing the reasons for the decision might assist public understanding.
Please note that statements may include graphic details of offences when it is necessary to fully explain the reasons behind a sentencing decision.
Follow us if you wish to receive alerts as soon as statements are published.
Once charges are spent, any statement in relation to them is removed and cannot be provided or acknowledged. Statements published before the launch of the website may be available on request. Please email judicialcomms@scotcourts.gov.uk.
The independence of the judiciary is essential to safeguard people’s rights under law - enabling judges to make decisions impartially based solely on evidence and law, without interference or influence from the government or politicians.
When deciding a sentence, a judge must deal with the offence that the offender has been convicted of, taking into account the unique circumstances of each particular case. The judge will carefully consider the facts that are presented to the Court by both the prosecution and by the defence.
For more information about how judges decide sentences; what sentences are available; and matters such as temporary release, see the independent Scottish Sentencing Council website.
Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.
HMA v Craig Dodds
Jun 25, 2025
On sentencing, Lord Harrower said:
"Craig Dodds, you have been found guilty of raping two women. In the case of the second complainer, the offence was aggravated by involving abuse of your partner. You were also found guilty of a separate offence against her under section 1 of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018. That offence was aggravated by involving behaviour directed towards, and behaviour in the presence of, a child.
Charge 1
The first charge resulted from a single incident of rape occurring on 26 or 27 August 2018. You had driven the complainer home after she had spent the evening socialising with a friend. She had had a lot to drink. She woke up to find you having sexual intercourse with her in her own bed. You didn’t withdraw even after she protested.
Charge 2
You then entered into a relationship with the second complainer. That relationship began to deteriorate. For a period of about two years, you engaged in a course of abusive behaviour towards her during which you would slam doors and punch walls, direct abusive and derogatory remarks at the complainer, and shout and swear at both the complainer and a child. You would also make threatening gestures towards the complainer, and on one occasion you assaulted her, by slapping her leg to her injury.
Charge 3
On one occasion, the second complainer woke up to find you penetrating her vagina with your penis. Feeling violated, she locked herself in the bathroom, had a shower, then spent the rest of the night on the sofa. Despite her protests, you continued to rape the complainer in the same manner, sometimes several times a week, during the course of the relationship. You would not be wearing a condom. The complainer did not want to have any more children at this stage in her life, for reasons that it is unnecessary to state here. You did not engage with the complainer when she raised these concerns with you.
Sentence
Craig Dodds, I must now assess the seriousness of your offending by reference to culpability and harm. So far as harm is concerned, I have had regard to the complainers’ evidence and to their personal statements which bear witness to the devastating psychological impact which your offending has had upon them. As regards culpability, I bear in mind that these are your first offences. Although you are now aged 25 and the guideline for sentencing young persons does not apply, I have taken account of your relative youth and immaturity at the time these offences were committed. Rehabilitation is an important consideration, and I bear in mind also that you have responsibilities as a father. But for all these considerations the sentence I am about to impose would have been significantly longer.
Had I been sentencing you separately in relation to these offences, I would have sentenced you as follows. In respect of charge 1, the offence is aggravated by reason of the fact that it occurred in the victim’s own home, while she was asleep or unconscious, and therefore in a vulnerable state. Your culpability is mitigated by youth and immaturity more for this offence than for the others. The term of imprisonment would have been 4 years and 6 months. In respect of charge 2, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 1 year, 3 months of which would have been attributable to the child aggravation. In respect of charge 3, not only was the complainer asleep at the time of your offending, but it occurred repeatedly over a lengthy period, during much of which she would have been particularly vulnerable as a result of the course of abusive behaviour you inflicted upon her. Your offending was further aggravated because you risked causing an unwanted pregnancy. In respect of this charge, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 6 years, 6 months of which would have been attributable to the domestic abuse aggravation.
The sum of these three periods is 11 years and 6 months, which would be excessive. I have therefore decided to impose a single in cumulo sentence in respect of all the charges against you. That sentence will be a term of imprisonment of 7 years and 6 months, backdated to 15 May 2025, when you were remanded in custody. I will attribute three months of that sentence to the domestic abuse aggravation in charge 3, and one month to the child aggravation in charge 2. You will be subject to the notification provisions of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for an indefinite period.
Non-harassment order
I will make a non-harassment order such that you may not contact, approach or communicate with either of the complainers, or attempt to contact, approach or communicate with them, whether directly or indirectly, for an indefinite period. This order does not prevent any communication with a third party that may be necessary in order to facilitate the exercise of any right of contact with a child."