Attorney General Reference No 6 of 2009

Where a young offender carries a knife in public for possible use and then uses it to stab another person, causing or intending really serious injury, custody will ordinarily be inevitable. Exceptional personal mitigation, remorse, low assessed risk of reoffending, and the damaging effect of detention may reduce the term but cannot justify a community sentence where the offence realises the public danger created by carrying a knife.

The Attorney General referred a sentence imposed on DR, aged 17, after he pleaded guilty at the Inner London Crown Court to wounding with intent contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and possessing a knife in a public place contrary to section 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953.

During a confrontation following a football game, DR produced a knife he had carried for self-defence and stabbed the complainant in the chest. The injury was fortunately limited, although it could readily have been fatal. The Recorder imposed an 18-month community order, unpaid work and a curfew. The central issue was whether, despite exceptional mitigation and severe mental-health vulnerability, a custodial sentence was required.

1. The court granted leave on the Attorney General’s reference, quashed the community sentence and imposed a 24-month detention and training order, concurrent on both counts.

2. DR had admitted carrying the knife for potential offensive or defensive use. During an angry confrontation he used it to stab the complainant in the chest, intending really serious bodily harm. The limited physical injury was fortuitous. The court stressed that the grave consequences of a stabbing frequently depend on chance.

3. Exceptional mitigation was recognised: DR’s age, immediate admissions, guilty pleas, good character, remorse, educational prospects, low risk of reoffending, and serious psychological vulnerability in custody. Those matters could affect the length of sentence, but not the requirement for custody.

4. The court applied the sentencing message in Attorney General’s Reference No 49 of 2008 [2008] EWCA Crim. 2304. A person who takes a knife into the street and then uses it to wound another must expect severe punishment. This case involved the precise danger at which the prohibition on carrying knives is directed. There could be no qualification to the conclusion that custody was inevitable.

5. In fixing the term, the court applied the policy in section 240 A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. It credited half of the 67 days spent subject to curfew, three days on remand, and work already completed. A 24-month detention and training order achieved justice. DR was permitted to surrender to custody on the following Monday, with arrangements requested for prompt collection and appropriate medical support.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On a reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court granted leave, quashed the community sentence and imposed a 24-month detention and training order.

• Inner London Crown Court: On 9 January 2009, following guilty pleas, the Recorder imposed an 18-month community order with supervision, 100 hours’ unpaid work and a six-month curfew.