SENTENCING STATEMENTS
A judge may decide to publish a statement after passing sentence on an offender in cases where there is particular public interest; where a case has legal significance; or where providing the reasons for the decision might assist public understanding.
Please note that statements may include graphic details of offences when it is necessary to fully explain the reasons behind a sentencing decision.
Follow us if you wish to receive alerts as soon as statements are published.
Once charges are spent, any statement in relation to them is removed and cannot be provided or acknowledged. Statements published before the launch of the website may be available on request. Please email judicialcomms@scotcourts.gov.uk.
The independence of the judiciary is essential to safeguard people’s rights under law - enabling judges to make decisions impartially based solely on evidence and law, without interference or influence from the government or politicians.
When deciding a sentence, a judge must deal with the offence that the offender has been convicted of, taking into account the unique circumstances of each particular case. The judge will carefully consider the facts that are presented to the Court by both the prosecution and by the defence.
For more information about how judges decide sentences; what sentences are available; and matters such as temporary release, see the independent Scottish Sentencing Council website.
Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.
HMA v Jason Motion
Jul 24, 2023
On sentencing, Lord Matthews said:
“You pleaded guilty at a preliminary hearing to charges on two indictments.
On 30 September 2021 at about 9pm you entered a car driven by a woman in Edinburgh near the castle and asked her for a lift. When she refused you told her you had a knife and she became fearful for her life. You demanded that she drive you to another part of Edinburgh. She managed to escape at a red light at the junction of Castle Terrace and Lothian Road but you climbed into her seat and drove off.
On the same evening at about 11pm you entered a caravan at Marine Drive Edinburgh, where a 76-year-old man had been sleeping. He had opened the door to you because you had put on a Hi-Viz jacket and shouted ‘Security’. You presented a knife at him, told him you had done 30 years in prison, that you would be doing another 15 and that killing him would only add another 5. Understandably the gentleman took this as a serious threat. You demanded all of his cash and his bank card and PIN. Then you demanded his car and forced him to leave the caravan with you, threatening to use the knife if he attracted attention. He fell and you pushed him back into the caravan before telling him to get dressed as you were taking him with you. You demanded the car keys and these were handed to you. You told him that you could puncture his lungs and stab him in the heart. Luckily he was able to run away and began to shout for help. People from other caravans responded but you locked yourself in the car where you acted aggressively and brandished the knife.
You tried to drive away but were prevented and police were able to detain you.
Both complainers have given statements where they clearly set out the psychological consequences they suffered and the female complainer suffered financially, not least because her car was written off.
I have listened to all that has been said on your behalf. No doubt you can come across as a friendly and straightforward individual when you choose but I doubt very much if that was the perception of your victims or the victims of the other crimes you have committed.
You have a bad record which includes a great many road traffic offences and offences of dishonesty but also abduction. In April 2003 you were sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years for assault to severe injury, permanent disability and danger of life. In June 2006 you were made subject of a consecutive extended sentence for assault.
It is clear from the circumstances of these offences, your record, the Criminal Justice Social Work Report and the Risk Assessment Report that you present a high risk to the public and I am satisfied that an Order for Lifelong Restriction is the only sentence which will provide protection from that risk.
Had I been sentencing you on the first indictment to a determinate sentence, I would have imposed an extended sentence of 17 years on charges 1 and 2, consisting of a custodial term of 12 years and an extension period of five.
The element of public protection would have been in the extension period.
In order to fix the punishment period of the sentence, I deduct three years to reflect the timing of your plea and I halve the 9 years to 4 years and 6 months to allow for the possibility of early release.
In short, I impose an Order for Lifelong Restriction in respect of charges 1 and 2, with a punishment part of 4 years and 6 months to run from 4 October 2021.
On each of charges 4 and 5 I impose a concurrent sentence of imprisonment for 18 months, reduced from 2 years to reflect the timing of the plea and on charge 6 I sentence you to imprisonment for 4 months, reduced from 6 for the same reason.
As far as the second indictment is concerned, I sentence you to imprisonment for 9 months, reduced from 12 for the same reason. That will also run concurrently. You will be disqualified for holding for obtaining a driving licence for life.
On charge 2 you will be admonished and any licence you hold will be endorsed.”
24 July 2023