Minimum terms
High Court setting of minimum terms for mandatory life sentences under the Criminal Justice Act 2003
Neutral Citation Number: 2006 EWHC 1922 (QB)
Case No: 2004/277/MTS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Date: 27th July 2006
Before :
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ROYCE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
Regina
- v -
James Warren Agius
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr Justice Royce :
1. The Defendant was born on 30th March 1980. On 4th July 2002 at the Central Criminal Court he was convicted of the murder of Allan Collins.
In the early evening of Saturday 30th June 2001 the Defendant killed Collins, who was aged 72, by striking him at least 12 times to the back and side of the head with a claw hammer. The incident occurred in the bedroom at the deceased’s home when he was naked. The motive was probably sexual and/or financial. The deceased was known in the area to be homosexual. After the killing the defendant removed hi-fi and TV/Video equipment taking it home by taxi. He pawned it two days later.
2. In his initial interviews the Defendant stated that the deceased had in the past made passes at him, but he had only been to his home once and was not there at the time of the killing. Subsequently he was to say that he had gone there with a prosecution witness and in effect blamed that witness. In evidence however his case was that he had killed the deceased because the deceased had tried sexually to interfere with him and that he had lost control of himself and struck him with a hammer.
3. The trial Judge His Honour Judge Gordon applied the then current guidance and took as his starting point 12 years. He listed the following aggravating factors:-
i) The nature of the attack
ii) The degree of force
iii) The number of blows
iv) An attack in the deceased’s home
4. He listed two mitigating factors:-
i) The defendant’s age (22)
ii) No previous convictions or prior violence.
5. He took the view that the mitigating and aggravating factors cancelled each other out and recommended twelve years. The Lord Chief Justice took the view that twelve years was an appropriate starting point but the use of the hammer required an increase. He recommended a minimum period of thirteen years.
6. I am required in considering the seriousness of the offence to have regard to the matters set out in schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. This in my judgement would have been a case which would have attracted a starting point of 15 years. I have to bear in mind that I may not set a minimum term higher than that which under the practice followed by the Secretary of State before December 2002 would have been likely to have been determined by him. That is likely to have been 13 years.
7. No representations have been received from the Defendant, neither have any been received from the deceased’s relatives. 8. My conclusion is that the minimum term in this case should be set at 13 years. The time spent in custody on remand of 10 months 8 days has to be deducted therefrom.
9. It is important that the public understands the setting of the minimum term does not mean that the Defendant will be released once that term is served. It merely means that his case will not be considered by the Parole Board before that time. It is if, and only if, the Parole Board concludes that it is safe for him to be released that he will be.