Thomas & Ors, R. v

Verdicts on separate counts are not inconsistent merely because they depend on some common evidence. The jury must decide whether every ingredient of each offence has been proved, and an acquittal on a homicide count may be consistent with convictions for violent disorder and conspiracy.

Bad-character evidence may be admitted where prior conduct involving knives is relevant to the defendant’s awareness and mens rea, provided sufficient similarity makes the evidence probative and its admission remains fair. A Turnbull direction is required for identification evidence, but not for evidence which merely describes an unknown offender. For offenders under 18, an extended sentence must not exceed the statutory maximum for the offence.

The appellants were tried at the Central Criminal Court before the Recorder of London and a jury. The prosecution alleged that a group associated with a street gang planned a retaliatory expedition, during which Yasin Abdirahman, an uninvolved person, was fatally attacked.

Thomas and Rahimi were convicted of violent disorder and conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm with intent. Cyrus was convicted of manslaughter and Williams of murder. Thomas, Rahimi and Cyrus appealed against conviction; all four appealed against sentence.

The appeals raised the consistency of Thomas’s verdicts, the admissibility of Rahimi’s bad character, whether descriptive evidence required a Turnbull direction, the sufficiency of the case against Cyrus, and the legality and appropriateness of the sentences.

1. Convictions. The court dismissed the appeals against conviction. Thomas’s acquittal of murder and manslaughter was logically compatible with his convictions for violent disorder and conspiracy. The jury could accept that he acted as a scout, encouraged the group and shared an intention to cause grievous bodily harm, while retaining a reasonable doubt about his presence or active participation in the fatal attack, his awareness of knives, or whether the stabbing fell within the scope of any joint responsibility.

2. The Recorder was entitled to admit Rahimi’s bad-character evidence under Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 101(1)(d). The earlier robberies were not admitted simply because they belonged to the same offence category. Their potential relevance lay in showing a willingness to join criminal activity in which knives were, or might be, used. That could assist the jury in deciding whether Rahimi knew of the knife or knives and had the mens rea for violent disorder and conspiracy. The differences between the earlier incidents and the charged offences did not make the ruling unfair or erroneous.

3. No Turnbull direction was required in Cyrus’s case. The witness did not identify Cyrus; he described an attacker’s height, clothing, walk, hair and bottle. The special warning is directed to the risk of an honest but mistaken identification, not ordinary descriptive evidence. Its weaknesses were matters for the jury. The prosecution evidence was capable of supporting a conviction and was properly left to the jury.

4. Sentences. The extended sentences imposed on Thomas and Rahimi for violent disorder were unlawful. Under section 228(5) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the total extended sentence for an offender under 18 could not exceed the five-year maximum for that offence. Each sentence was replaced with a concurrent five-year extended sentence, comprising four years’ detention and one year on licence.

5. Cyrus’s seven-year custodial term and four-year extension were upheld. The dangerousness assessment and the need for long-term supervision justified an extended sentence. Williams’s minimum term was reduced from 14 to 12 years. The Recorder had insufficiently reflected both Williams’s markedly younger age and John-Lewis’s substantially greater leadership and organising role.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) In [2010] EWCA Crim 148, dismissed the conviction appeals, dismissed Cyrus’s sentence appeal, and allowed the sentence appeals of Thomas, Rahimi and Williams to the limited extent stated.
• Central Criminal Court On 5 January 2009, the Recorder of London and a jury convicted Thomas and Rahimi of violent disorder and conspiracy, Cyrus of manslaughter, and Williams of murder; sentences were then imposed.