Webster v R

• Jurisdiction: Cayman Islands
• Judge: (Chadwick, P., Mottley and Campbell, JJ.A.)
• Judgment Date: 27 November 2013
• Date: 27 November 2013
• Court: Court of Appeal (Cayman Islands)

Court of Appeal

(Chadwick, P., Mottley and Campbell, JJ.A.)

WEBSTER

and

R.

The appellant appeared in person;

Ms. T. Lobban-Jackson, Senior Crown Counsel, for the Crown.

Cases cited:

(1) R. v. FawcettUNK(1983), 5 Cr. App. R. (S.) 158, applied.

(2) R. v. SpenceUNK(1983), 5 Cr. App. R. (S.) 413; [1984] Crim. L.R. 372, applied.

Sentence-co-accused-when co-accused of similar culpability given different sentences, court may reduce longer sentence if disparity would cause right-minded member of public (with full knowledge of facts and circumstances) to consider something wrong with administration of justice-if disparity due to excessive discount, court may re-calculate starting point necessary to reach shorter for offender with longer sentence-may reduce sentence even if no reason other than disparity to do so

The appellant was charged with, inter alia, abduction, keeping an abducted person in confinement, blackmail, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

The appellant (A) and two others (B and C) were recruited by D to help abduct the victim and blackmail his mother. A and B had been recruited at a much later stage than C, but all three were involved in luring the victim into their trap and had contributed to his brutal treatment. After they were arrested, C pleaded guilty, gave full cooperation to the police and gave evidence on behalf of the prosecution. D was arrested, but fled the jurisdiction before he could be tried. The Grand Court (Harrison, Ag. J. sitting alone) found A and B guilty. It identified, as mitigating factors, that A had previously been of good character and had children outside of the jurisdiction. The court stated that, as D was the mastermind, he would have received a greater sentence than A, B or C had he stood trial, and the reasonable starting point for his offences of abduction and keeping in confinement would have been 15 years” imprisonment. It accordingly sentenced A and B to, inter alia, 10 years” imprisonment for abduction and keeping an abducted person in confinement, 6 years” imprisonment for blackmail and 3 years” imprisonment for assault occasioning bodily harm. C was sentenced to 5 years” imprisonment for the abduction, 3 years” imprisonment for blackmail and 2 years” imprisonment for assault occasioning bodily harm. A and B were further sentenced to 2 years” imprisonment for threatening violence and 5 years” imprisonment for robbery, with which C was not charged. All sentences were to be served concurrently. A appealed on the ground that his sentences were excessive.

A submitted that the disparities between his sentences and C”s sentences were so large that A”s sentences must have been excessive. C had

been involved in the joint venture at a much earlier stage and, notwithstanding that he pleaded guilty and gave evidence for the prosecution, it was unfair that he received sentences which were only half as long as A”s.

Held, allowing the appeal in part:

(1) The disparities between the sentences imposed upon A and C were so large as to make A”s sentences excessive. As the culpability of A and C for the offences was not substantially different, the court would be able to reduce the sentence if right-minded members of the public, with full knowledge of the relevant facts and circumstances, would consider-upon learning of the sentences-that something had gone wrong with the administration of justice, which was the case here. Although C was entitled to a substantial discount for his guilty plea, for his cooperation with the police and for testifying for the prosecution, a discount of 50% was excessive. A sentence of 5 years for abduction and keeping an abducted person in confinement, after taking into account the relevant mitigating factors, would indicate a starting point of 8 years. As there was no reason why A should be sentenced on the basis of a higher starting point, his sentence for abduction and keeping an abducted person in confinement would be reduced from 10 to 8 years” imprisonment and his sentence for blackmail would be...