The defendants appealed their sentences for murder and grievous bodily harm. Each was sentenced with minimum periods set under section 216 of the 2003 Act. Five youths (including the defendants) had severely beaten up a young man, and when his girlfriend intervened the assaulted and killed her.
Held: The judge had taken as a starting point the twelve year sentence set out in the Act and adjusted it for the age of the defendants, and then for the serious aggravating factors. But for their age, he said the starting point would have been 30 years. The question for the judge should have been whether the seriousness of the case was sufficiently high, recognising that the list of factors in the section was not exhaustive. The judge had found this to be a hate crime based solely on the different appearance of the victims as goths. Nor could the judge’s findings that the defendants would pose a continuing threat after release be faulted. The appeals failed. The first defendant’s admission of his involvement had however been disclosed in his defence statement, and therefore not only on the day of trial, and his minimum term was to be reduced by one year.
Judges:
Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Owen and Mr Justice Christopher Clarke
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Crim 2501, Times 24-Nov-2008, [2009] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 9
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Height and Anderson, Regina v CACD 29-Oct-2008
The appellants had been convicted of a murder. They appealed against the minumum sentences as set, saying that the application of the 2003 Act produced an unfair result. The murder was of the wife of the second defendant who paid the first to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.277323