Faulds, R v

A minimum term imposed on a person detained during Her Majesty’s pleasure may be reduced on review where there is clear evidence of exceptional and unforeseen progress in custody. Relevant indicators include sustained exemplary conduct, genuine remorse and responsibility, constructive relationships, and successful engagement with offending-related work producing reduced risk. These matters are not individually or collectively conclusive. An additional element is required, showing that the detainee has become trustworthy when given responsibility. Sustained achievement across more than one institution strengthens the assessment. Trusted positions undertaken without abuse, together with substantial work benefiting others, may provide that additional element.

Lewis Faulds was convicted of murder committed when he was 16 and was ordered to be detained during Her Majesty’s pleasure. The sentencing judge specified a nine-year minimum term, reduced by time spent on remand. After six years in custody, he applied for a review based on his conduct, courses, relationships, remorse and trusted prison roles. The victim’s family opposed any reduction. The issue was whether his progress met the threshold for exceptional progress identified in R (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 51.

1. The court accepted the governing principle stated in R (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 51; [2006] 1 AC 159: a tariff imposed on a person detained during Her Majesty’s pleasure may be reduced on reconsideration where there is clear evidence of exceptional and unforeseen progress.

2. Indicative evidence includes an exemplary work and disciplinary record, genuine remorse and acceptance of appropriate responsibility, successful relationships with prisoners and staff, and engagement with work or offending-related courses resulting in a substantial reduction in risk. Ideally, these matters should be sustained over a lengthy period and demonstrated in more than one prison. None is conclusive.

3. The threshold also requires an additional element showing that the detainee has become trustworthy when entrusted with responsibility. Good work for the benefit of others may demonstrate that element.

4. Faulds had maintained exemplary conduct for approximately six years in more than one institution. He accepted responsibility, showed victim empathy, maintained constructive relationships, completed relevant courses, undertook education, and held trusted roles without difficulty. His Koestler award for work benefiting children, together with his trusted positions, supplied the additional element required.

5. On the basis of his exceptional progress, the minimum term was reduced by one year.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 16 April 2010, the appeal against conviction and sentence was refused, although the sentence of a co-defendant was reduced by one year: [2010] EWCA Crim 871.
• High Court (Queen’s Bench Division): On review, the minimum term was reduced by one year.