SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Lord Scott said:

"Over a 15-month period from June 2021 to September 2022, each of you participated in the serious sexual abuse and exploitation of vulnerable and mostly young women in the Dundee area.  There were various reasons for their vulnerabilities, including difficult family circumstances and use of drugs. By offering them an apparently unending supply of mostly free crack cocaine, you exacerbated their vulnerabilities and then proceeded to exploit them for your own sexual gratification and whims and, in some cases, for financial gain.

No doubt you assumed, rightly for some time, that the drug-related lifestyles of the women would mean that you were not reported or detected. To some extent, that attitude and delusions of impunity persist in some of the reports before me with continuing efforts to use the vulnerability of the women to try to attack their credibility. Such attitudes do you no good, indeed they aggravate matters at this stage.

It may be that you thought that no one cared for your victims, meaning you could do whatever you wanted to them without consequence. If so, events have proven you wrong.

Each of the women who gave evidence against you found the strength to do so, despite their difficulties. In the main, they have taken significant steps to move on from the stage of their lives disclosed in the charges on the indictment. I commend them for having taken back control of their lives and for being able to testify about the abuse they suffered at your hands.

It is clear from their verdicts that the jury understandably and overwhelmingly accepted the vast majority of the evidence of these women and entirely rejected unconvincing denials and claims of consent. By contrast to the evidence given by each of you, the women were careful, credible and convincing. Your victims are now survivors, albeit no doubt permanently damaged by what you did to them.

You acted much of the time as a group, with your offending a product of unhealthy dynamics in the close connections of family and friendship between you. I note from the reports available to me that those connections and relationships appear to persist even now. You each now stand convicted of charges alone and with other accused. In passing sentence, I am reflecting precisely your criminal responsibility as set out in the charges where the jury convicted. In my remarks, I will not spell out much detail of the particular forms of sexual abuse that featured.

I take account of everything said in mitigation by each of your lawyers and the content of your respective reports. I take account of information about your respective states of physical and mental health. I take account of the extent of the criminal records of those of you who have them. None of you has previously been convicted of a sexual offence. I sentence you only on the charges of which you were convicted. I take account of the fact that English is not your first language and some of you do not speak it much at all. I take into account that you will be serving this sentence far from most of your family and friends. That arises, however, only because of the decisions you made in carrying out these serious offences.

I note too that, while it remains a decision only for the Home Office, it is likely that you will each be deported upon completion of these sentences.

Each of you faces very serious charges. You are not all in the same position but each of you has committed at least one rape. The third accused faces the most charges but it is important to observe that while the rest of you face far fewer charges, your position is only less serious by comparison to his conviction for 10 charges of rape. Every one of you would be in the High Court for the charges you face even if indicted alone and the charges are serious even if there are some which are more serious than others.

All 5 of you will be subject to notification requirements indefinitely.

In each of the following respects, to the extent they apply in your individual cases, there is no suitable alternative to a sentence of imprisonment for the gravity of your crimes which involved a catalogue of serious sexually exploitative and abusive conduct of vulnerable women.

In the case of each of you, it is necessary to protect the public from you, and to seek to deter you and others from abusing vulnerable individuals in all of the ways featuring in this case. Such conduct must attract severe punishment in order to mark adequately the gravity of your crimes, expressing the abhorrence of the community for such abuse of vulnerable individuals.

I take account of the suffering of the women and the consequences they carry with them which are likely to continue. The impact of your conduct is extremely serious and can be expected to be enduring.

I must take account of the information provided in impact statements from and about the 4 victims who have felt able to commit the impact on them to writing.

Before referring to the charges you were convicted of, I must make it clear that drug taking offers no mitigation whatsoever for the sexual abuse and mistreatment inflicted on these women.

In making the following remarks, I use the numbering of the charges on the original, record copy indictment.

CHRISTIAN URLATEANU

You were convicted of charges 3, 9, 10, 23, 24, 35, 36, 44 and 48. You are 41 years old. I am told that you have been in Scotland since 2021, having been born in Romania and lived most of your life there.

Despite claiming in evidence and in the Criminal Justice Social Work Report (CJSWR) that you had never been in trouble with the police, you have a conviction for breach of bail. In addition, you left Scotland while on bail for the present case. It was necessary to extradite you so you could face trial.

I have read the CJSWR and heard today from Ms Gray on your behalf. I leave out of account much of the Risk Assessment Report (RAR) for reasons discussed at the last hearing. I note that you have a good record of employment.

In the CJSWR, on the jury’s verdict, you have deflected, minimised, denied and lied. You have shown no insight or remorse. You consider yourself a victim whereas the truth is that 5 vulnerable young women were your victims. On the evidence, you appear to have been in a leading position in this group with others responding to your wishes in particular.

The report states:

‘Mr Urlateanu and his co-accused have shown a considerable level of planning, coercion and organisation in the commission of the abuse they have subject victims to. They targeted vulnerable females within the community, exploited them for the purposes of sexual gratification and used the supply of substances as means to exert control and power over victims. The harm caused to victims is significant and likely to have long term consequences in relation to both their physical and mental health.

Given the seriousness of Mr Urlateanu's index offences, he is assessed as presenting a significant risk to females known to him and is considered to have the potential to seriously endanger the physical or psychological well-being of females he comes into contact with.’

The risk assessment in the report concludes:

‘Until such time Mr Urlateanu completes programme work to address his abusive behaviours, he will be considered to present a significant risk of harm to females he comes into contact with.’

The risk is assessed to be such that an extended sentence is necessary.

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, only a custodial sentence is appropriate.  It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way and in particular to protect the public from you.

Having reflected carefully on all of the circumstances, in particular the combination of serious charges, the established and entrenched behaviour and the insights in the justice social work report and parts of the RAR, in my judgement the normal period of licence would not be enough to protect the public from serious harm from you.  Accordingly, I consider that the custodial sentence in your case should be by way of an extended sentence.

The maximum sentence for charge 3 is 7 years’ imprisonment. On all the other charges, the maximum sentence is life imprisonment, although the multiple rapes are the most serious charges you have been convicted of.

Given the timing of your pleas of guilty, I consider that they had no utilitarian value and I would not therefore have reduced the sentences on that account.

Had I been sentencing you separately on each charge, I would have imposed the following sentences:

Charge 3 – living on the earnings of prostitution - 18 months’ imprisonment

Charge 9 – supplying cocaine to others - 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 10 – rape – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 23 – rape – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 24 – rape on various occasions along with Alexandra Bugonea – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 35 – rape along with Remus Stan and Catalin Dobre – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 36 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 44 – rape – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 48 – on various occasions, sexual coercion and coercion into being present during a sexual activity along with Alexandra Bugonea – 4 years’ imprisonment

Adding these sentences together gives a total of 56 and a half years’ imprisonment which would be excessive for the course of behaviour as reflected in the indictment. The sentences on the charges involving two complainers respectively may have been ordered to be served concurrently where they were part of the exact same course of conduct against each victim. That would still give a total of 40 and a half years’ imprisonment.

In the circumstances, and having regard to the principle of totality, I sentence you to a cumulo extended sentence of 20 years with a custodial term of 18 years and an extension period of 2 years. I impose that sentence on all charges except charge 3 in respect of which I order you to serve a concurrent sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment and charge 9 on which you will serve a concurrent sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment. The sentence will date from 12 January 2024 which is the date you were arrested in Belgium.

In addition, I must consider whether to make a non-harassment order in relation to your victims.  I will make such an order.

The conditions of that order are as follows:

That you must not approach, contact, communicate directly or indirectly with your victims or attempt to approach, contact or communicate with them. The order will be for an indeterminate period and will commence today.

ALEXANDRA BUGONEA

You were convicted of charges 9, 10, 24, 48 and 49. You are 35 years old. You have no previous convictions. It was also necessary to extradite you so you could face trial. I am told that you have been in Scotland since 2021, having been born in Romania and lived most of your life there until you came here with the first accused.

I have read the CJSWR and heard today from Mr Stewart on your behalf. I therefore know about the adverse childhood experiences and difficult life you have had and that, to some extent at times, you too may have been exploited by others. However, in the report you state that you were never forced to do anything and you continue to excuse, support and justify the position of your co-accused. Your involvement at the time, whether planned or not, helped to lure and reassure some of the victims that they would be safe as there was a woman present. I do not take that too far as it appeared clear that the victims came to get drugs even after being abused.

In the CJSWR, on the jury’s verdict, you have deflected, minimised, denied and lied. You have shown no meaningful insight or remorse. There are 4 direct victims of sexual abuse by you, usually when acting with a co-accused.

The report states:

‘Ms Bugonea was adamant that she has not done anything wrong. She said that she considered some of the women who went to her flat as being her friends, and that they had not made complaints of being raped. Ms Bugonea said that she had never forced anyone in to doing anything, and had never witnessed any of the other co-accused doing anything that she considered wrong or illegal.’

I was particularly struck by the following section:

‘The sexual offences perpetrated against the victims were serious in nature, and likely to have caused psychological harm. It is noted from Police information that some of the victims may not have considered themselves to be victims, which highlights their vulnerabilities and susceptibility to exploitation. The victims were likely to have been groomed, and not been able to fully appreciate that they were being taken advantage of to meet the sexual needs of others.’

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, only a custodial sentence is appropriate. It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way.

The maximum sentence for all 5 charges is life imprisonment, although charges 16 and 35, the charges of attempted rape and rape, are the most serious charges you have been convicted of.

Had I been sentencing you separately on each charge, I would have imposed the following sentences:

Charge 9 – supplying cocaine to others - 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 10 – sexual coercion – 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 24 – rape along with Christian Urlateanu on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 48 – on various occasions, sexual coercion and coercion into being present during a sexual activity along with Christian Urlateanu – 4 years’ imprisonment

Charge 49 – sexual penetration – 2 years’ imprisonment

Adding these sentences together gives a total of 20 years imprisonment which I consider would be excessive for the course of behaviour as reflected in the indictment.

In the circumstances, and having regard to the principle of totality, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 8 years’ imprisonment. The sentence will date from 12 January 2024 which is the date you were arrested in Belgium.

In addition, I must consider whether to make a non-harassment order in relation to your victims.  I will make such an order.

The conditions of that order are as follows:

That you must not approach, contact, communicate directly or indirectly with your victims or attempt to approach, contact or communicate with them. The order will be for an indeterminate period and will commence today.

MIRCEA MARIAN CUMPANASOIU

You were convicted of charges 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 25, 31, 32, 46, 47, 50, 52, 54, 56, 57 and 59. You also pled guilty to charges 3, 52 and 59. No schedule of convictions has been tendered in your case.

You are 38 years old. I am told that you have been in Scotland since 2021, having been born in Romania and lived most of your life there until you came initially to Birmingham in 2018.

I have read the CJSWR and heard today from Mr Keegan on your behalf. I note that you have a good record of employment. I note that you have undertaken a harm reduction programme in custody to try to address your drug problem.

In the CJSWR, on the jury’s verdict, you deflected, minimised, denied and lied. You showed no meaningful insight or remorse. You seemed to view yourself as a victim in this case whereas the truth is that there are 7 direct victims of serious sexual abuse by you. Mr Keegan said that you did yourself no favours when you gave evidence as you were under the influence of spice. Given the evidence in the case, it may be that seeing you under the influence of such a substance provided the jury with some insight into how you can be when affected by the consumption of strong drugs.

The report states:

‘The index offences were committed over a period of time and targeted a number of vulnerable victims, using significant planning and coercion in order to exploit them for purposes of sexual gratification and financial gain. During interview Mr Cumpanasoiu acknowledged that the women involved were expected to engage in sexualised behaviour for continued access to drugs, however he did not consider this to be coercive in any way. Mr Cumpanasoiu justified this behaviour stating he told the victims crack cocaine made him ‘horny’. There was evidence for rape supportive attitudes and entitlement given Mr Cumpanasoiu's lack of empathy towards the victims, their circumstances, and his inability to see his behaviour as harmful in any way.’

The risk assessment states:

‘Mr Cumpanasoiu has evidenced his ability to perpetrate serious harm to others, specifically vulnerable women. From available information he appears to have been key to the identification, targeting and recruitment of females for exploitation. Mr Cumpanasoiu and his co-accused have shown significant planning, grooming, coercion and organisation in the perpetration of their abusive behaviour for their own sexual gratification and financial gain, over a period of twenty one months. It is further evident the victims were unable to give free consent having been supplied with crack cocaine and Mr Cumpanasoiu subjected victims to degrading abuse.

Although Mr Cumpanasoiu maintains his stance of innocence, the harm caused is significant and likely to have caused serious and enduring psychological harm. Mr Cumpanasoiu's offending falls within the definition of having caused serious harm from which recovery may be expected to be difficult or impossible. Further, the victims are likely to experience reduced resilience to other life stressors as a result of the index offences.

Due to the seriousness of Mr Cumpanasoiu's index offending he is assessed as presenting a high risk of serious harm to women.’

In your case, I have also seen a full RAR. While there are some indications of insight and remorse in it, and the overall assessment was of medium risk, there is still some self-justification in it and the insight and remorse are fairly superficial. However, the risk assessor concluded:

‘Mr Cumpanasoiu admitted his involvement in the index offences, expressed a commitment to engaging in rehabilitative interventions, supervision, and expressed remorse for his behaviours. As a result of the above information, and taking into account the balance of risk and protective factors, there are characteristics in this case that indicate measures short of lifelong restriction may be sufficient to minimise the risk of serious harm to others.’

As Mr Keegan submitted, however, there are some positive signs and an extended sentence is sufficient to meet the risk in your case notwithstanding the significant number of charges of rape you were convicted of.

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, however, only a custodial sentence is appropriate. It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way and in particular to protect the public from you.

Having reflected carefully on all of the circumstances, in particular the combination of serious charges, the established and entrenched behaviour and the insights in the justice social work report and the RAR, in my judgement the normal period of licence would not be enough to protect the public from serious harm from you.  Accordingly, I consider that the custodial sentence in your case should be by way of an extended sentence. This was recommended in the CJSWR in the event that the court was not imposing an Order for Lifelong Restriction.

The maximum sentence for charges 1, 2 and 3 is 7 years’ imprisonment. For charge 52, it is 5 years. On all the other charges, the maximum sentence is life imprisonment, although the multiple rapes are the most serious charges you have been convicted of.

Given the timing of your pleas of guilty, I consider that they had no utilitarian value and I would not therefore have reduced the sentences on that account.

Had I been sentencing you separately on each charge, I would have imposed the following sentences:

Charges 1 and 2 – managing or assisting in the management of a brothel - 18 months’ imprisonment on each charge

Charge 3 – living on the earnings of prostitution - 18 months’ imprisonment

Charge 9 – supplying cocaine to others - 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 11 – sexual coercion on various occasions acting along with Catalin Dobre – 4 years’ imprisonment

Charge 12 –rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 13 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 25 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 31 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 32 – rape – 10 years’ imprisonment

Charge 46 – rape – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 47 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 50 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 52 – possession of a knife – 12 months imprisonment

Charge 54 – the human trafficking offence – 5 years’ imprisonment

Charge 56 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 57 – rape along with Remus Stan – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 59 – attempting to pervert the course of justice – 2 years’ imprisonment.

Adding these sentences together gives a total of 101 and a half years’ imprisonment which would be excessive for the course of behaviour as reflected in the indictment. The sentences on the charges involving certain complainers respectively may have been ordered to be served concurrently where they were part of the exact same course of conduct against each victim. That would still give a total of 71 and a half years imprisonment.

In the circumstances, and having regard to the principle of totality, I sentence you to a cumulo extended sentence of 24 years with a custodial term of 20 years and an extension period of 4 years. I impose this on all charges except charges 1, 2, 3 in respect of which I order you to serve concurrent sentences of 18 months imprisonment, charge 9 on which you will serve a concurrent sentence of 3 years imprisonment, charge 52 for which you will serve a concurrent sentence of 12 months and charge 59 for which you will serve a concurrent sentence of 2 years imprisonment. The sentence will date from 5 October 2022.

In your case, I have been asked to make a Trafficking and Exploitation Order in view of your conviction on charge 54. Having read the application and the response prepared on your behalf, I will not make a Trafficking and Exploitation Prevention Order. Such an order is intended to address future risk. Given the lengthy extended sentence I am imposing, I consider that any risk is sufficiently addressed without such an order.

In addition, I must consider whether to make a non-harassment order in relation to your victims.  I will make such an order.

The conditions of that order are as follows:

That you must not approach, contact, communicate directly or indirectly with your victims or attempt to approach, contact or communicate with them. The order will be for an indeterminate period and will commence today.

REMUS STAN

You have no previous convictions but have been convicted of charges 3, 9, 30, 35, 54, 55, 57 and 59. You are 35 years old. I am told that you have been in Scotland since 2020, having been born in Romania and lived most of your life there and in Spain.

Despite claiming in evidence that you had never been in trouble before, you have 2 convictions – one is for a minor road traffic matter, but you also received a 3 month prison sentence for having a mobile phone in custody.

I have read the CJSWR and heard today from Mr Brown on your behalf. I note that you have a good record of employment.

In the CJSWR, on the jury’s verdict, you have deflected, minimised, denied and lied. You have shown no insight or remorse.

The report states:

‘These offences are serious in nature and involve a high degree of serious harm given that they were contact sexual offences. It is evident there is a high level of planning involved in the commission of the offences over a long period involving grooming vulnerable females, supplying them with illicit substances and coercing them into sex work…

It is clear that they used the supply of illegal drugs to groom vulnerable females in order to meet their sexual and financial needs. The offences involve adult females but show a degree of entitlement and rape supportive attitudes.’

You have been assessed as suitable for the Moving Forward, Making Changes programme or a similar intervention while in custody to try to address some of the thinking that led to your serious offending. The report says that such work would have to be completed before your release.

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, only a custodial sentence is appropriate. It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way and to protect the public from you. In view of the terms of the CJSWR, I am not satisfied that an extended sentence is necessary.

The maximum sentence for charge 3 is 7 years imprisonment. On all the other charges, the maximum sentence is life imprisonment, although charges 30, 35, 55 and 57, the rapes, are the most serious charges you have been convicted of.

Had I been sentencing you separately on each charge, I would have imposed the following sentences:

Charge 3 – living on the earnings of prostitution - 18 months’ imprisonment

Charge 9 – supplying cocaine to others - 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 30 –rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 35 – rape along with Christian Urlateanu and Catalin Dobre – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 54 – the human trafficking offence – 5 years’ imprisonment

Charge 55 – rape on various occasions – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 57 – rape along with Mircea Cumpanasoiu – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 59 – attempting to pervert the course of justice – 2 years’ imprisonment.

Adding these sentences together gives a total of 43 and a half years imprisonment which I consider would be excessive for your course of behaviour as reflected in the indictment. The sentences on the charges involving the trafficking complainer may have been ordered to be served concurrently as they were part of the exact same course of conduct against a single victim. That would still give a total of 30 and a half years imprisonment.

In the circumstances, and having regard to the principle of totality, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment on all charges except charge 3 in respect of which I order you to serve a concurrent sentence of 18 months imprisonment. The sentence will date from 25 November 2022 to take account of the 3-month sentence you served during the remand period.

In your case, I have been asked to make a Trafficking and Exploitation Prevention Order in view of your conviction on charge 54. Having read the application and the response prepared on your behalf, I will make a Trafficking and Exploitation Prevention Order. Such an order is intended to address future risk. As I am not imposing an extended sentence, I consider that such an order is necessary in your case. The order will be in the terms sought by the Crown and is for a period of 5 years following your release.

In addition, I must consider whether to make a non-harassment order in relation to your victims. I will make such an order.

The conditions of that order are as follows:

That you must not approach, contact, communicate directly or indirectly with your victims or attempt to approach, contact or communicate with them. The order will be for an indeterminate period and will commence today.

CATALIN FLORIN DOBRE

You were convicted of charges 9, 11, 16, 35 and 40. You are 45 years of age and have no previous convictions. It was also necessary to extradite you so you could face trial. I am told that you have been in Scotland since 2012, having been born in Romania.

I have read the CJSWR and heard today from Mr Gilfedder on your behalf. I note that you have a good record of employment from which you send money to your son in Romania. The breakdown in your relationship with his mother is said to have been followed by you ‘spending an increasing amount of time with an anti-social peer group’, namely your family and the others who are now your co-accused. Mr Gilfedder emphasised that you did not have a leading role in the group although, on the evidence, you were at least a willing follower.

In the CJSWR, on the jury’s verdict, you have deflected, minimised, denied and lied. You have shown no insight or remorse. You consider yourself a victim whereas the truth is that 4 vulnerable young women were your victims.

The report states:

‘Mr Dobre and his co-accused identified numerous females who were drug users and used this to exploit their victims for the purpose of their own sexual gratification. The abuse was insidious and manipulative, with some victims not realising that they were being subject to abuse or exploitation. The high level of organisation and coercion made it difficult for police officers to detect the offending due to the fact that victims were reluctant to make reports or seek support. In addition, the number of perpetrators and properties created significant challenges for the police attempting to bring the perpetrators to account.

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, only a custodial sentence is appropriate. It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way and to protect the public from you.

The maximum sentence for all 5 charges is life imprisonment, although charges 16 and 35, the charges of attempted rape and rape, are the most serious charges you have been convicted of.

I could impose separate sentences on each charge but that would run the risk of imposing an excessive sentence. In any event, the charges really just reflect the whole course of criminal behaviour in which the supply of drugs was an intrinsic part of serious and sustained sexual abuse.

Had I been sentencing you separately on each charge, I would have imposed the following sentences:

Charge 9 – supplying cocaine to others - 3 years’ imprisonment

Charge 11 – sexual coercion on various occasions acting along with Mircea Cumpanasoiu – 4 years’ imprisonment

Charge 16 – attempted rape – 4 years’ imprisonment

Charge 35 – rape along with Christian Urlateanu and Remus Stan – 8 years’ imprisonment

Charge 40 – sexual assault – 12 months’ imprisonment

Adding these sentences together gives a total of 20 years’ imprisonment which I consider would be excessive for your course of behaviour as reflected in the indictment.

In the circumstances, and having regard to the principle of totality, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. The sentence will date from 5 December 2023 which is the date you were arrested in the Czech Republic.

In addition, I must consider whether to make a non-harassment order in relation to your victims.  I will make such an order.

The conditions of that order are as follows:

That you must not approach, contact, communicate directly or indirectly with your victims or attempt to approach, contact or communicate with them. The order will be for an indeterminate period and will commence today."