Peters & Ors, R v

[2005] EWCA Crim 605

Case details

Case citations
[2005] EWCA Crim 605 · [2005] 2 Cr App R (S) 101 · [2005] 2 Cr App R(S) 101 · [2005] 2 Cr App.R (S) 101
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
10 March 2005
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Sentencing Murder
Keywords
murder minimum term mandatory life sentence Schedule 21 offender age and maturity intention to cause grievous bodily harm guilty plea discount racial aggravation sentencing appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part (campbell); peters and palmer appeals dismissed
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

For a murder minimum term, the court must begin with the prescribed starting point under Criminal Justice Act 2003, Schedule 21, but must then make an overall assessment of seriousness. The listed aggravating and mitigating factors are examples, not an exhaustive or arithmetical tariff.

Age must be assessed by reference to maturity and culpability as well as the statutory age band. An intention to cause grievous bodily harm rather than death may mitigate, but does not do so automatically. A guilty plea may receive the maximum credit where it is indicated promptly after necessary leading counsel advice, provided responsibility for the death was indicated at an early stage.

Factual background

Three young offenders, each serving a mandatory life sentence for murder, appealed the minimum terms fixed under section 269 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Their unrelated appeals were heard together as a Guideline Court.

Peters, aged 19, pleaded guilty after a public stabbing and received a nine-year minimum term. Palmer, aged 19, was convicted after a racially motivated fatal attack with a wooden post and received 12 years. Campbell, aged 18 years and two months, was convicted of murdering her close friend and received 12 years without credit for 207 days on remand.

The common issues concerned youth and maturity, an intention to cause grievous bodily harm rather than death, and the proper credit for a guilty plea to murder.

Held

The appeals of Peters and Palmer were dismissed. Campbell’s appeal was allowed. Her minimum term was reduced from 12 years to nine years, with credit for 207 days spent on remand.

  1. Under section 269 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the mandatory life sentence protects the public. The minimum term instead reflects punishment and deterrence through the seriousness of the offence. A sentencing judge must identify the Schedule 21 starting point, consider all relevant circumstances, and explain any departure from the normal starting point.

  2. Schedule 21 does not produce a mathematical calculation. Its aggravating and mitigating factors are illustrative. The court must make a single overall assessment of seriousness, rather than add and subtract fixed periods for individual features. On appeal, the court will not interfere unless the minimum term is wrong in principle or manifestly excessive.

  3. The statutory age bands provide the required starting point, but age alone does not establish maturity or culpability. For offenders aged up to about 21 or 22, the court should make an appropriate allowance, potentially substantial, for relative immaturity. It must not invent a sliding statutory starting point between birthdays.

  4. An intention to cause grievous bodily harm rather than death is capable of mitigation under Schedule 21. It is not automatic. Its weight depends on the whole context, including premeditation, the nature of the violence, whether death was a likely consequence, and the use of a weapon.

  5. For a guilty plea to murder, a defendant may reasonably need leading counsel’s advice before deciding whether to plead. Maximum credit will normally require an early factual indication of responsibility for the fatal injuries or death, followed by a plea as soon as practicable after that advice. Courts should use case-management powers to secure an early consultation.

  6. Applying those principles, Peters’ nine-year term and Palmer’s 12-year term were within the proper range. Palmer’s partially racial motivation was a serious aggravating feature. Campbell’s term insufficiently reflected her youth and emotional immaturity, notwithstanding aggravating features arising from her determined pursuit of the victim.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — in [2005] EWCA Crim 605, dismissed the Peters and Palmer sentencing appeals. It allowed Campbell’s appeal, reducing her minimum term to nine years and directing credit for remand time.

  • Central Criminal Court — Peters pleaded guilty to murder and received life imprisonment with a nine-year minimum term, less 231 days on remand.

  • Crown Court at Snaresbrook — Palmer was convicted of murder and sentenced to detention for life with a 12-year minimum term, less 321 days on remand.

  • Crown Court at Warwick — Campbell was convicted of murder and sentenced to custody for life with a 12-year minimum term; no credit was initially given for 207 days on remand.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
appeal allowed in part (campbell); peters and palmer appeals dismissed

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.