The defendants sought to appeal against their sentences for withholding information about terrorism.
Held: The factor determing the sentence was not principally the extent of the information which might have been provided, but rather the seriousness of the terrorist activity. Time which had been spent awaiting trial subject to a curfew enforced by means of an electronic tag was to be given credit against time to be served at the rate of one day’s custody for each two day period of curfew.
Judges:
Lord Justice Latham, Mr Justice Openshaw and Mr Justice Burnett
Citations:
[2008] EWCA Crim 2653
Links:
Statutes:
Criminal Justice Act 2003 240A, Terrorism Act 2000 38B(2)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Girma and Others, Regina v (Rev 1) CACD 15-May-2009
The court asked whether the conviction of a co-defendant was correctly admitted as evidence against her co-accused, and if not what was the effect on the fairness of the trial.
Held: The plea of the co-defendant should not have been admitted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.278212
