BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> C & Ors, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 1441 (19 June 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/1441.html Cite as: [2009] EWCA Crim 1441, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep (S) 55, [2010] 1 Cr App R (S) 55 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Strand London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE MADDISON
MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM
____________________
R E G I N A | ||
v | ||
(1) L J C | ||
(2) A T | ||
(3) R |
____________________
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Miss J Rowley appeared on behalf of the Third Appellant
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
"L J C, A T and [R] on the 18th day of July 2008 together with others, without lawful excuse damaged motor vehicles travelling on the A465 at Merthyr Tydfil intending to damage property or being reckless as to whether property would be damaged and being reckless as to whether the life of Stephen Powell would thereby be endangered."
It was agreed by all concerned that this count was to be treated as a specimen of the numerous offences of a similar kind committed by the applicants.
"1. On 18th July 2008 at about 4 pm I did go to the A465 Heads of the Valley Road with L and A in full knowledge that they threw stones.
2. I gathered stones and put them in my coat pockets, which were handed to the boys.
3. At no time did I throw any stones or any other object."
"I begin by making it clear that there is nothing that I can do or any judge could do or say or sentence that could be passed that could put right the permanent feelings of grief, devastation and loss, occasioned to the family of Mr John Wells, who was entirely blameless and who needlessly lost his life on the Heads of the Valley Road on the afternoon of 18th July 2008."
We too have read the statements and echo the judge's remarks.
"However, even though I am of the opinion that secure accommodation is not the most desired environment for a boy of L's age, it is currently proving to be the only environment where his behaviour can be challenged in order that risk to the community and himself, in the longer term, can be minimised. L is an extremely vulnerable young man and I feel that at this present moment, a Secure Centre setting is the safest and most appropriate place for him to be."
"These include low educational attainment and ability, poor thinking skills and low self-esteem. The asset tool indicates that there is an medium to high risk of the defendant re-offending in the future. These factors, combined with other associated family and emotional problems would indicate that A is a vulnerable young person who can easily be drawn into offending situations."
Recognising that a custodial sentence would be the starting point, the report on A T nevertheless recommended a supervision order with a curfew condition.
"In my opinion, the defendant has a number of difficulties, which are having a negative impact on her wellbeing and also contributed to the committal of this offence. These problems include learning and behavioural difficulties, poor thinking and social skills, and long-standing welfare concerns. I feel that these issues make it difficult for her to think consequentially and that she has a tendency to fabricate stories and self-harm in a misguided attempt for help and attention from professionals. Also, as stated earlier her demeanour and desperation to 'fit in' with a peer group make her a vulnerable young person, who is susceptible to bullying and peer pressure. Her lack of appropriate social skills further increases her vulnerability."
The report acknowledged that a custodial sentence was the likely starting point. Nevertheless, it recommended either a referral order or a supervision order with a curfew condition if a community based disposal was thought appropriate.
"In the result, as it turned out, while the prosecution take the view that in law these defendants could not be held responsible directly for the death of Mr Wells, the fact is that as a result of what they were doing and while it was going on, an unknown motorist, for perhaps understandable reasons, appears to have panicked and stopped his vehicle in the carriageway. As a result of that another driver who was, in my judgment, it would appear, blameless himself had to swerve, not only to avoid the debris left in the road from the missiles which had been thrown at other vehicles but also to avoid the car which had stopped in front of him and as a result of that the fatal collision occurred in which Mr Wells lost his life and as I understand it an occupant of the other vehicle involved sustained a broken arm."
The judge made it clear that in sentencing he was reflecting the different ages of the appellants, the fact that L C had a worse criminal record than A T, and that R had no previous convictions. But all three appellants had pleaded guilty to a very grave offence. The sentences had to reflect their deliberate and malicious conduct and act as a deterrent for other like-minded youngsters.
"Should the decision be made on 20th June [which should read '19th June', that is today] that [R] is released she will revert instantly to being at risk of significant harm."