Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Soldier who raped woman he met on dating app has sentence increased

A panel of judges at the Appeal Court ruled that the original sentence was ‘unduly lenient’.

Nick Forbes
Friday 27 June 2025 14:06 BST
A soldier who raped a woman he met on a dating app has had his sentence increased after Appeal Court judges ruled it was ‘unduly lenient’ (Jane Barlow/PA)
A soldier who raped a woman he met on a dating app has had his sentence increased after Appeal Court judges ruled it was ‘unduly lenient’ (Jane Barlow/PA) (PA Archive)

An army officer who raped a woman he met on a dating app has had his prison sentence increased following a Crown appeal.

Calum MacGregor, 30, sexually assaulted and raped his victim in her home in December 2021.

He was originally jailed for four-and-a-half years after being found guilty at the High Court in Edinburgh earlier this year.

However, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) appealed against the sentence on the basis it was “unduly lenient” given the serious nature of the offence.

COPFS asked the Appeal Court to consider imposing a longer custodial term.

On Friday, it was announced that the appeal has been upheld by a panel of three judges at the Appeal Court and that MacGregor’s original sentence has been quashed.

The soldier will now serve six years and six months in custody.

Laura Buchan, deputy crown agent, said: “Prosecutors have a responsibility to consider appeals based upon undue leniency in sentencing. Such appeals are rare.

“Today’s decision to increase Calum MacGregor’s sentence for rape provides public reassurance that the impact of sexual offences on victims will be acknowledged by those in the criminal justice system.”

COPFS explained that for an appeal to be upheld a sentence must be unduly lenient, meaning it falls outside the range of sentences a judge could “reasonably” have considered appropriate, having taken all relevant factors into account.

It added that while sentencing is “rightfully” the domain of judges, the Crown is allowed to appeal in limited circumstances to ensure the “balance of justice” is served.

In their ruling, published on Friday, the Appeal Court judges said they were “not convinced that the sentencing judge applied her mind to all relevant factors”.

The ruling said: “In all the circumstances, even allowing for mitigating circumstances, a sentence of imprisonment for four years and six months was unduly lenient.

The judges added that they would “impose a sentence of imprisonment for six years and six months. As before, sentence is backdated to January 30 2025”.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in