Two days before stricter domestic abuse laws went into effect, a parish council chairman who strangled his wife until she could not breathe during an argument escaped going to prison.
On June 5, 2022, 53-year-old Richard Charlton, a member of his neighborhood Round Table organization, viciously assaulted and suffocated India Charlton, his wife of 23 years.
According to testimony given at Warrington Magistrates Court, the man seized Mrs. Charlton, 49, by the hair before repeatedly bashing her head against a table and a wall.
Later, Charlton was charged with assault and left their marital home in the Cheshire hamlet of Malpas. On Tuesday, he was given a sentence of 80 hours of unpaid labour and 16 weeks in jail with an 18-month suspension.
Along with the 33-day Building Better Relationships program, he was also required to do 35 days of probationary rehabilitation work.
The court said that under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which became effective on June 7 of this year, if Charlton had struck his wife “at a somewhat later period,” he would have been “charged with non-fatal strangling.” The maximum term for non-fatal strangulation is five years.
The council chairman, who also works as a key account manager for a pharmaceutical company and earns £75,000 yearly, is now in danger of losing his position.
How did the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 alter the laws around suffocation and strangulation?
On June 7, 2022, new law that provided prosecutors the ability to pursue violent abusers with specific offenses of non-fatal strangling and non-fatal suffocation took effect.
An individual “commits an offence of non-fatal strangulation if they willfully strangle another person,” according to the Domestic Abuse Act of 2021, which established this new legal classification.
When someone engages in any “other conduct that limits someone’s capacity to breathe and constitutes battery,” they have committed non-fatal suffocation.
The maximum sentence for both offenses is five years in jail.
Six months in jail is the maximum penalty for common assault.
Strangulation and suffocation “may sometimes leave little apparent injuries, making it difficult to prosecute under existing charges such as Actual Bodily Harm,” according to worries that criminals were evading punishment.
The absence of obvious damage is “not a justification to detract from the severity of these offenses,” according to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
The new advice also clarifies the “rough sex” defense, which makes it clear that victims cannot agree to the infliction of major damage or death, and explains when non-fatal strangling and non-fatal asphyxia may occur in rape or serious sexual offenses.
According to research, people who have previously suffered from non-fatal strangulation are more likely to be killed by their spouses.
At 3.26 am on Sunday, June 5, police officers rushed to a neighbor’s home after receiving a contact from West Midlands Ambulance Service.
After her husband attacked her after an altercation, Mrs. Charlton was able to escape her house and call 911.
Unknown is the topic of the argument.
According to testimony given in court, the victim described how Charlton had grabbed her by the neck for a brief period of time and had hit her head against the wall.
As soon as Mrs. Charlton reported the attack, the first responder notified them and then phoned the police.
She demonstrated how her husband had struck her head against a wall while yelling, “Bang, bang, bang,” to the responding police officers.
She said that after doing so, he grabbed her by the hair, pulled her toward the kitchen table, and caused her to stoop until his hands were around her neck and she was struck “two or three times” on the head.
Prosecutor Natasha McAdam stated, “She had phoned for an ambulance, stating that her spouse was attempting to strangle her and hitting her head against the wall.”
The officer allegedly saw a red mark on Mrs. Charlton’s neck and in her blonde hair, according to the prosecution.
Although there was no obvious damage, she also complained of swelling and soreness on her head.
Mrs. Charlton told police that her husband had pushed her over the kitchen table and back into the kitchen after grabbing hold of her head, according to Ms. McAdam.
He took her by the neck and held her there for a few seconds. She demonstrated to the cops how he had struck the wall with her head two or three times.
After being accused of assault, Charlton, who formerly served as chairman of the Malpas Parish Council and is a director of a nearby sports organization, moved in with his sister in Stockton Heath, close to Warrington.
According to defense attorney Steve Fearns, his client struggled with alcohol and had been abusing it for a while at the time the offense was committed.
Mr. Fearns praised Charlton, saying, “The defendant has been very repentant throughout these proceedings.”
He was outraged and resentful about his conduct, and he finds it hard to believe he did it. He has never carried out an action like this before.
“It is obvious that alcohol contributed to the offense.” He had been attempting to drink less booze.
He had taken far more alcohol over a long period of time before to the offense, which is why he had memory problems.
He has been dating the complainant for 27 years, and they have been married for 23 years, Mr. Fearns said. He lives with his brother and sister-in-law, while she lives at the marital house.
He will follow his wife’s wishes, but he is completely open to reconciliation. He will accept it entirely if she wants it to end. He will accept accountability for his deeds since he is the one who brought about this important problem.
He wants to be able to return to work and now earns £4,200 per month after deductions. For a major pharmaceutical business, he is in charge of sales across the north and east of the Midlands.
He is unsure whether he will be allowed to return to that employment permanently, but he is hopeful if he is given a community sentence. He is likely to lose his employment if he is given a jail or prison term, even if it is suspended.
It will affect the complaint since she lives in the marital home, where he is responsible for paying the expenses.
District Judge Jack McGava interrupted the mitigation to state that the strangling made the assault a severe offense, and when informed that Mrs. Charlton had no obvious injuries, he said, “I don’t care.”
The woman believed she was about to pass away. The danger of strangulation is great. He would have faced charges of non-fatal strangulation and been brought before the crown court had the crime been committed at a little later time.
He exercises control when he clutches someone’s throat and prevents them from breathing. If the individual is still alive, he may influence it. It elevates the attack to a dangerous level. This has been the subject of much investigation.
Although I acknowledge that he was accused of common assault, it doesn’t really matter. It is a really significant issue and a highly irritable trait.
After admitting to assault by beating, Charlton was facing prison time; however, when his wife refused to cooperate with the prosecution, he was released with a suspended sentence.
The council chairman had not previously been in difficulty, the judge said, so he had deferred the punishment.
I do give you credit for your guilty plea, but this is a very severe assault, the judge informed him. In this instance, the victim was unaware of what was about to occur. She was afraid of passing away. She was unable to breathe.
“The home setting raises the seriousness of this issue. Your wife has a right to think that she is loved and treated with respect, not in this manner. The fact that you were intoxicated is an aggravating factor that makes it more severe rather than less serious.
Because of how terrible the offense is, neither a fine nor a community punishment can be justified.
Charlton was also had to pay victim surcharge and costs of £248.
A restraining order or order for damages was not also issued since his wife did not support the prosecution.
Mrs. Charlton, a tireless charity fundraiser, continues to reside at the marital home, while Charlton continues to live with his sister.
The pair has been married for 23 years and has been together for 27 years; they are childless.
‘I have been a prior member of Round Table, a group for young men focusing on humanitarian work in the community,’ Charlton claims on his council biography. While participating for the Sports Club in 2013, I assisted in reviving the neighborhood darts league in Malpas and managed the logistics necessary to conduct the league.
Along with socializing with friends and family, I also like gardening, doing DIY, playing the guitar, playing cricket, repairing automobiles, and playing cricket. I have also been a Chester Football Club follower throughout my life. I strongly believe that every member of a community should have a chance to speak out and get direct responses or solutions to their issues.
Involving parishioners who may feel excluded and celebrating community spirit, according to the speaker, are essential for the parish’s long-term success.
Approximately 15 years after being diagnosed with ME (chronic fatigue syndrome), Mrs. Charlton participated in a skydiving in 2020 to raise money for Alzheimer’s research.
She missed her husband’s case on Tuesday in court.