Trudi Burgess: ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ attacker Robert Easom jailed for 16 years after severing partner’s spinal cord
Robert Easom has been sentenced to 16 years in prison after a brutal attack on trudi burgess on 17 February 2025 that severed her spinal cord and left her paralysed. The sentence follows a trial which concluded that the assault was the culmination of a relentless eight-year campaign of coercive and controlling behaviour.
Sentencing at Preston Crown Court
Easom, 57, was convicted of wounding with intent following a trial at Preston Crown Court in November; a jury reached its verdict after 27 minutes of deliberation. Judge Robert Altham imposed a 16-year custodial term followed by a four-year extended licence period for the offences of wounding with intent, two charges of actual bodily harm and coercive and controlling behaviour.
Injuries to Trudi Burgess
Trudi Burgess, 57, a schoolteacher and former singer from Chorley, Lancashire, suffered a complete spinal cord injury and is tetraplegic. She is still in a spinal injuries rehabilitation unit, requires continuous specialist care, will never walk again, experiences constant pain, cannot cough without assistance, has no use of her hands and has lost control of bladder and bowel functions.
Events of 17 February 2025 and emergency call
When Burgess told Easom she was leaving their relationship on 17 February 2025, he launched a brutal assault that severed her spinal cord. In the immediate aftermath Easom called emergency services and told them Burgess had "fallen out of bed" and had "landed in a bad way with her neck. " Police described the attack as the "horrific climax" of the relationship.
History of coercive and controlling behaviour documented on her phone
Police found the assault followed a sustained pattern. Easom had admitted engaging in coercive and controlling behaviour between July 2017 and February 2025, and had previously pleaded guilty to two offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Throughout the relationship Burgess kept records of the abuse in the notes section of her mobile phone.
Incidents and patterns of abuse
The prosecution outlined multiple episodes of verbal and physical abuse that escalated over years: forcing Burgess to clean up spilled food, pushing her against furniture, headbutting her, shouting, and driving dangerously to frighten her. About seven months into the relationship, on a trip to York in 2018, Easom “switched” into a rage, dragged her around a bathroom and threatened her, quoting a line from the film Rambo.
In 2019 he grabbed her glass of wine and violently dragged her upstairs by the head, banging it against each step. In 2021, again in York, he placed a sheet over Burgess’s head and strangled her; the next day he dismissed that attack as an attempt to "teach her a lesson. " The court heard that these episodes were followed by apologies and affection, which trapped Burgess in a cycle of abuse.
Voices in court: victim, family and investigators
Burgess attended the sentencing hearing in person and delivered a victim impact statement describing her life as "destroyed, " and detailing emotional harms including depression, daily anxiety, symptoms of PTSD, flashbacks and nightmares. A statement read outside court by her brother, Charlie, said the sentence reflected the seriousness and lasting impact of the abuse.
Detective Constable Bethanie Kirk characterised Easom as a "manipulative, controlling and cowardly individual. " Prosecuting counsel Sarah Magill told the court that at times Burgess would feel loved but "the next he would hurt her, humiliate her and make her feel small. " The court also heard that Easom had berated her with insulting language and repeatedly undermined her confidence, telling her she could not cope without him.
Defendant’s stance and judicial reasoning
Easom, of Chipping near Preston and described in court as a landscape gardener, denied a charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and argued he had not intended to cause serious harm. The jury nevertheless convicted him of wounding with intent. Judge Altham acknowledged that no sentence could equal the harm caused, but concluded that an extended determinate sentence was required to protect the public, adding that this was not a case warranting a whole life term.
What makes this notable is the way the case combined a single catastrophic injury with a detailed record of long-term coercive control, documented contemporaneously by the victim and accepted by the court as part of the prosecution case.
