New Sentencing Guidelines Launched on Manslaughter by Reason of Provocation and Robbery
28 Nov 2005
The Sentencing Guidelines Council (SGC) - the independent body comprising members of the judiciary, police, legal professions and those with substantial experience of promoting victims' interests - has today published a final guideline applying to offenders found guilty of manslaughter, rather than murder, on the basis they were provoked and a draft guideline for judges and magistrates on sentencing for robbery.
The SGC produces guidelines designed to promote an effective and consistent approach to sentencing in individual cases. .The final Manslaughter by Reason of Provocation guideline has been drawn up after extensive consultation, following the publication of the draft version in May 2005, which involved responses from the Home Secretary, Lord Chancellor and Attorney General. The draft Robbery guideline has been developed following advice from the Sentencing Advisory Panel, which consults widely before tendering advice, and the guideline itself will now be subject to a consultation period.
Summary of final manslaughter by reason of provocation guideline
This offence is established where the prosecution has proved that the offender killed and intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm but the jury concludes that the offender may have been provoked to such an extent that self control was lost.
The guideline makes clear that even under provocation the taking of a life should almost always result in a custodial sentence and that non-custodial sentences should only be imposed in exceptional cases. The sentencer must balance the degree and extent of provocation with the offender's response when determining the appropriate sentence. If the judge believes that the offender represents a significant danger to the public, sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which makes specific provision for dangerous offenders to ensure public protection.
The SGC has put forward three sentencing ranges and starting points for this form of manslaughter. The Council is aware of the current ongoing review of murder, which may lead to a change in the law in due course, and the guideline may need to be revisited at the conclusion of that process.
The Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips, Chairman of the Sentencing Guidelines Council said:
"The circumstances surrounding such manslaughter cases are sometimes tragic and the details of individual cases vary considerably, making it extremely difficult to be prescriptive. In the guideline, we have had to strike a difficult balance between recognising the sanctity of human life, whilst giving effect to legislation that recognises human fallibility under provocation. The guideline covers all manslaughter offences where provocation is involved, not just killings that occur in a domestic context. The Council and the Panel are very much aware of the specific issue of domestic violence and so additional work will be carried out in this area next year."
Summary of draft robbery guideline
The draft guideline covers in detail three types of robbery: street robbery (mugging); robberies of small businesses; and less sophisticated commercial robberies and draws attention to existing decisions of the Court of Appeal in relation to two other recognised categories of robbery (violent personal robbery in the home and professionally planned commercial robbery) which remain relevant guidance.
If in the eyes of the Court an offender (whether an adult or young offender) convicted of robbery represents a significant danger to the public, the offender should be sentenced in accordance with the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which makes specific provision for dangerous offenders to ensure public protection.
The offence of robbery should generally warrant a custodial sentence for adult offenders, and the guideline puts forward custodial sentences ranging from between one and twelve years, depending on the seriousness of the crime. The maximum penalty for robbery by law is life imprisonment. In exceptional cases where there are significant mitigating factors, a community sentence may be deemed appropriate.
For young offenders, the recommended sentences in the guideline range from a community order for the least serious offences to up to ten years' detention. This accords with the way in which young offenders convicted of robbery are currently sentenced. Again, even for young offenders, the maximum penalty by law is detention for life.
The guideline outlines a wide range of aggravating factors relevant to the offence of robbery for judges and magistrates to take into account. These make the crime more serious and affect the resulting sentence. Examples are where:
-
the offender is the ringleader of a gang
-
the offence was pre-planned
-
the victim was restrained or subjected to degradation
-
the victim is particularly vulnerable
Commenting on the guideline, Ken Macdonald QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions and member of the SGC, said:
"Robbery is a serious crime and the Council believes that offenders should receive a custodial sentence, unless there are significant mitigating factors. The guideline recognises the wide variety of circumstances in which the offence can be committed. Thus it proposes substantial custodial sentences where the violence is serious and at the other end of spectrum community orders, which themselves are tough and demanding sentences".
"All forms of robbery can be highly traumatic for the victim and the SGC has gone to great lengths to ensure that the guideline takes the impact on the victim into account when an offender is sentenced. We are recommending that the use of a weapon will result in a custodial sentence with a starting point of four years - even if the weapon is only used to threaten and not to harm. The SGC recommend that muggers who operate in gangs will be treated more severely as the intimidation and fear caused to the victim is likely to be greater. Where a victim is particularly vulnerable, that is always to be regarded as an aggravating factor."