A Barry man who subjected his fiancée to a relentless campaign of control and surveillance has been handed a suspended jail sentence, following a harrowing case that has drawn attention to the devastating impact of coercive relationships. Lee Winmill, 45, was found to have turned the couple’s relationship into what was described in court as “a prison”, isolating his partner from her loved ones and intruding on every aspect of her private life.
The case was heard at Cardiff Crown Court, where disturbing details of Winmill’s possessive behaviour emerged. Winchester’s conduct became increasingly oppressive after the pair became engaged in 2023. According to evidence presented, he frequently accused his partner of infidelity, invading her privacy by monitoring her activities through security cameras installed at their home. He reportedly tracked her movements, demanded updates on her whereabouts, and would even contact acquaintances if she did not answer her phone.
In addition to physical surveillance, Winmill would listen in on his partner’s conversations with neighbours, even interrupting via speaker to assert his presence. The court heard that this level of scrutiny escalated over time, with the victim receiving a barrage of calls and messages, leaving her feeling trapped and unable to live a normal, independent life. Neighbours, family, and friends became off-limits unless Winmill gave his approval, resulting in her growing isolation.
The coercion extended to interactions within the household. If maintenance workers visited, Winmill’s jealousy would surface, questioning why his partner was in their company and expressing suspicion over her every move. In one incident, the prosecution revealed, he went through their laundry and confronted the victim over her underwear, launching fresh accusations of infidelity.
Tensions frequently boiled over into verbal aggression. In a particularly distressing episode following an argument, the victim took to sleeping on the sofa, only to be later accused by Winmill of “having sex in her sleep” – a claim accompanied by abusive language. Attempting to end the cycle, the victim terminated the relationship and asked him to leave their shared home. Undeterred, Winmill soon returned, pounding on the bathroom door while she showered and subjecting her to further verbal attacks.
The aftermath of the breakup offered no respite. Winmill reportedly inundated his former fiancée with unwanted phone calls and texts and was seen parking for hours outside her home. Police intervention became necessary, but the intimidation persisted, leading to his eventual arrest. Although he denied being a jealous partner during the investigation, Winmill later admitted a count of controlling and coercive behaviour.
A powerful victim impact statement read in court painted a grim picture of the psychological toll inflicted by Winmill’s actions. The survivor described enduring months of fear after the separation, plagued by sleeplessness and anxiety, feeling compelled to change her routines and even her route to local shops to avoid him. She reported suffering severe mental ill-health, including suicidal thoughts and significant weight loss.
In mitigation, defence lawyer Adam Sharp remarked that Winmill, a father of six with grandchildren, was previously of good character and that his actions were “out of character”. The court was told he has since begun a new relationship and maintained employment as a mechanic.
Judge Daniel Williams acknowledged the profound harm caused by Winmill’s conduct. He commented that such behaviour “gradually erodes autonomy and one’s sense of self,” summarising the insidious intent behind coercive control. While sentencing Winmill to nine months’ imprisonment, the judge suspended the term for 18 months, ordering 180 hours of unpaid work and participation in a 30-day rehabilitation activity. An eight-year restraining order was also imposed to protect the victim.
This case highlights the enduring effects of domestic abuse and the growing recognition by the courts of coercive and controlling behaviour as a serious criminal offence, warranting significant judicial scrutiny and robust protective measures for survivors.