Odegbune & Ors v R.

For murder committed by an offender under 18, the 12-year starting point in Schedule 21 remains subject to a fact-sensitive assessment of seriousness. Features which would increase an adult starting point, including taking weapons to the scene for use, may substantially aggravate the minimum term for a young offender.

In manslaughter, the fact that death resulted gives harm the greatest weight. Planned public violence involving weapons also requires deterrent sentencing. A conspirator acquitted of homicide must, however, be sentenced for the intended non-fatal harm without importing the fatal outcome into the conspiracy sentence.

Following a planned armed confrontation between groups of young people at Victoria Station, a 15-year-old boy was fatally attacked. Eight young offenders appealed or renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentences imposed at the Central Criminal Court after convictions for murder, manslaughter, conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm and violent disorder.

The appeals concerned minimum terms for youthful murderers, determinate sentences for manslaughter, and the proper sentence for conspirators acquitted of involvement in the homicide. The central issues were the significance of planning, weapons, youth, deterrence and the extent to which individual roles required differentiation.

1. The appeal by Odegbune was allowed. His minimum term for murder was reduced from 18 to 16 years. His leadership in organising and leading the armed confrontation was highly aggravating, but the material did not justify attributing to him the specific intention to kill found in those who directly carried out the fatal stabbing. His leadership responsibility could not be double counted.

2. The appeals of Richards and Amoah were allowed. Their seven-year sentences for conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm were quashed and replaced with sentences of five and a half years. They joined the conspiracy only at Victoria Station, were neither armed nor involved in the fatal attack, and had been acquitted of homicide.

3. Under Criminal Justice Act 2003, Schedule 21 supplies starting points rather than inflexible steps. The sentencing court must adjust the minimum term for all aggravating and mitigating features. For an offender under 18, the 12-year starting point does not prevent the court treating as aggravating the features that would increase the starting point for an adult. The court emphatically endorsed that approach, including the serious aggravation constituted by weapons taken to the scene for use.

4. For manslaughter, Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 143(1), requires regard both to culpability and harm. Death is harm at the highest level. The planned mass violence, public setting, weapons and risk of serious injury made deterrence necessary. The 12-year manslaughter sentences were neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

5. A sentence for conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm, where the offender was acquitted of homicide, must be assessed by reference to intended injury alone. The fatal injuries cannot aggravate that sentence. The remaining renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence were refused.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In Odegbune & Ors v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 711, the court reduced Odegbune’s minimum term and substituted lower sentences for Richards and Amoah. It refused the remaining renewed applications.
• Central Criminal Court: His Honour Judge Christopher Moss QC sentenced the offenders on 20 April 2012 following convictions in a series of trials for murder, manslaughter, conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm and violent disorder.