The law on intentional strangulation
Intentional strangulation was introduced as a specific offense under section 70 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, coming into force in June 2022.
Prior to this, allegations involving pressure to the neck or restriction of breathing were typically prosecuted as:
- Common assault, or
- Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH)
These charges often failed to reflect the potentially fatal risks associated with strangulation, particularly where there were no visible injuries.
However, the Crown Prosecution Service has altered its approach to charging the offense of intentional strangulation since June 2022. Join Harewood Law as we explain why the law changed, how the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) now approaches these allegations, what must be proven, and how courts assess culpability and sentence.
Change of use by the Crown Prosecution Service
Since the introduction of the offense, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has significantly altered its charging approach.
Conduct that may previously have resulted in a low level assault charge is now frequently charged as intentional strangulation, particularly in domestic settings. This reflects CPS guidance that strangulation should be treated as a serious warning sign of escalating violence.
As a result:
- Charges are now brought earlier in investigations
- Allegations are often charged even where injuries are slight
- Cases are more likely to be sent to the Crown Court
CPS’s new focus on recognising patterns of domestic abuse
The CPS has recently launched a refreshed strategy, part of its five year Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) plan, aimed at ensuring prosecutors are better equipped to identify and respond to patterns of domestic abuse, not just single acts. Under this approach, offenses such as intentional strangulation, stalking, and controlling or coercive behaviour are treated as interconnected behaviours that often occur in a domestic context.
This reflects a national strategic shift to:
- Improve prosecutors’ understanding of how domestic abuse behaviours overlap
- Build cases that reflect the full reality of an offender’s conduct
- Train staff in trauma informed and victim centred decision making
- Better support victims through the prosecution process
Importantly, the CPS reports that charges for intentional strangulation, along with related VAWG offenses, continue to rise, and that more than three quarters of cases flagged as domestic abuse in some areas result in conviction.
Why this matters: This strategic focus helps explain why prosecutors are more likely to charge intentional strangulation and related offenses, even where each incident might previously have been treated separately or as a lower level assault.
Cases are built on the totality of behaviour
Prosecutors are now advised to look beyond individual, isolated incidents and to consider how patterns of abuse, including physical violence, strangulation, coercive behaviour, threats, stalking and harassment, form part of a wider narrative of offending.
This means that even where strangulation might appear minimal in isolation, it can be charged and prosecuted more robustly when seen as part of:
- Repeated coercive control
- Victim targeted manipulation
- Stalking or harassment behaviours
- Other linked offenses such as threats or intimidation
What the prosecution must prove
To secure a conviction, the prosecution must prove that the defendant:
- Intentionally strangled another person or performed an act affecting their ability to breathe, and
- That the act was deliberate rather than accidental
There is no requirement to prove:
- Loss of consciousness
- Serious injury
- Lasting harm
Evidence commonly relied upon includes:
- The complainant’s account
- Body worn video footage
- Emergency call recordings
- Medical notes and photographs
- Expert evidence on the effects of strangulation
Levels of culpability
The Sentencing Council guidelines divide offending into three levels of culpability, which play a central role in determining sentence.
High culpability
High culpability cases often attract immediate custodial sentences, even for first time offenders. This includes cases involving:
- Sustained or repeated pressure to the neck
- Deliberate targeting of the throat
- Use of significant force
- Evidence of controlling or coercive behaviour
Medium culpability
These cases can still result in custody, depending on harm and aggravating features. This may involve:
- Pressure applied for a shorter duration
- Less force, but still intentional
- Some awareness of risk to the complainant
Lower culpability
Lower culpability may be found where:
- The act was brief
- Force used was limited
- There was no sustained pressure
However, even lower culpability cases are treated as serious and do not automatically avoid imprisonment.
Sentencing and the role of the Crown Court
Intentional strangulation carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment. Although the offense can be dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court, many cases are committed to the Crown Court, as magistrates’ sentencing powers may be insufficient.
For higher culpability cases, the starting point for sentence can be around 18 months’ custody, even where injuries are minimal.
Mitigating factors
Mitigation can play an important role in sentence, but courts approach these cases cautiously given the inherent risks involved.
Potential mitigating factors include:
- Previous good character
- Genuine remorse
- Early guilty plea
- Evidence of provocation or contextual stress
- Mental health issues
- Lack of premeditation
That said, mitigation will rarely outweigh serious aggravating features, particularly where there is a domestic history or evidence of control.
Why early legal advice is crucial
Early legal advice is vital. Issues such as intent, duration of contact, medical evidence, and alternative explanations can be decisive in how a case progresses.
The offense of intentional strangulation reflects a significant shift in how the criminal justice system approaches allegations arising from domestic incidents. With the CPS increasingly focused on recognising patterns of behaviour rather than isolated events, individuals can now face serious charges at a much earlier stage, often with life changing consequences.
Given the complexity of the law, the evolving prosecutorial approach, and the severity of potential sentences, early and specialist legal advice is essential. Allegations of this nature require careful analysis of the evidence, the wider context, and the CPS charging rationale from the outset.
Harewood Law has extensive experience advising and representing individuals accused of serious assault and domestic related offenses, including intentional strangulation. We provide clear, practical advice at every stage of an investigation or prosecution, with a focus on protecting our clients’ rights and achieving the best possible outcome.
