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

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.

Read more about civil judgments.

HMA v Kevin Suttie


Mar 7, 2024

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lord Tyre sentenced Kevin Suttie to three years in prison after the offender was convicted of two historic sexual abuse charges.

On sentencing, Lord Tyre told Suttie:

“You have been convicted of two offences of sexual abuse, committed in the 1990s when you were aged between 15 and 18.  A long time has passed since then, but these were serious offences against two young and vulnerable children, aged around 12-14 at the time.  You must have known that they did not understand what was happening and yet you proceeded to take advantage of them.  You went so far as to threaten one of them with violence if he told anyone what had happened.  I consider that there is a high degree of culpability and there are also indications of harm to your victims.

You are currently serving a sentence of imprisonment for more recent offending, and I see no need to adjourn this case to obtain further information before sentencing.

Since the offences of which you have now been convicted were committed before any of those in the schedule of previous convictions, they are of limited relevance and I do not attach any significant weight to them.  I attach more importance to the fact that both of the offences included penetration of the complainer’s mouth by your penis and that one also involved an attempted anal penetration.  I am in no doubt that the only appropriate sentence is a custodial sentence. 

I have listened to what has been said on your behalf by Mr Miller, and I take account in particular of your age at the time when the offences were committed.

As the offences were charged as a course of criminal conduct, I regard it as appropriate to impose a single sentence, known as a cumulo sentence, on both charges.  In all the circumstances I sentence you to a period of imprisonment for three years, which will be served consecutively to the custodial sentence that you are currently serving.

Although you are already subject to the notification requirements of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, I am required to state again that you have been convicted of a sexual offence to which Part 2 of that Act applies, and that you will be placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register for an indefinite period.  You will be given details of the notification requirements with which you must comply.  I shall also direct the clerk of court to intimate details of your conviction to the Scottish Ministers in terms of section 14 of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007.”