SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Lord Cubie said: 

"You pled guilty to assault to severe injury, danger of life, and thereby to attempted murder.

I have listened to what has been said on your behalf, and taken into account the terms of both the criminal justice social work report (CJSWR) and the psychological report which I read yesterday. I also take account of the victim impact statement provided on the last occasion.

The psychological report makes for tragic reading; you were born suffering drug withdrawal symptoms; your home life was characterised by drug taking and domestic violence between your parents; you were accommodated by two different relatives before spending time in residential care; each chapter of your life was unstable and gave rise to a degree of psychological trauma. The report describes your childhood as containing a complete lack of physical and psychological safety. You began drug and alcohol use at an early age. Your emotional regulation was badly affected.

You had to deal with the death of a girlfriend who took her own life. You yourself have had suicidal ideation and attempts at self harm. The psychological report mentions intrusive memories and nightmares which you try to block out by drink and drugs. You identify difficulties in relationships and in trust issues. You may have complex post traumatic stress disorder. The recommendations are with engagement with addiction services, and engagement in focused intervention and psychological interventions to address the trauma and the link with violence.

The CJSWR reflects a degree of remorse and regret; counsel has today confirmed your contrition and your disgust at your behaviour; the report emphasises the issues with mental health and emotional wellbeing. I cannot overlook the fact that you have apparently declined any offered intervention to support these issues. For example CAMHS, the LAC nurse, resilience and life story work. You are reluctant 'to open up'.

Your record is limited but shows a tendency to anti social behaviour. There has been, as I understand the position, no further offending since this incident. You are assessed as a high risk of general offending with a low risk of imminent serious harm.

I require to take into account the sentencing guidelines which are applicable; the principles and purposes, and the process, as well as importantly the young persons’ guideline.

The sentence imposed must be fair and proportionate; and the court should assess the seriousness of the offence by evaluating the level of culpability and harm.

In sentencing a young person, particular regard should be had to: the maturity of the young person; and the prospect of rehabilitation.

It is recognised that a young person will generally have a lower level of maturity, and a greater capacity for change and rehabilitation, than an older person.

This means I have to have regard to your intellectual and emotional maturity at the time the offence was committed. Young people are generally less able to exercise good judgement when making decisions; you do not seem to have been subjected to peer pressure or some kind of exploitative relationship, but I do recognise that in carrying out this assault, you may have been less able to think about what could happen as a result of your actions, including the impact on the victim and others affected by those actions; and you may have taken more risks. As a consequence I recognise that your culpability is to some extent lower than that of an older person who is to be sentenced for the same, or a similar, offence; the sentence imposed will be modified to reflect that also.

I turn to the offence. From the narrative it seems to have been the case that any dispute was nothing to do with you. But you joined in on an attack on the complainer with others and you have accepted repeatedly punching and kicking him which, as the footage showed, culminated in you kicking him on the head three times and then stamping four times on his head, the last two of which took place when he was motionless. These were not flailing or aimless attempts to hit a moving body but studied blows, perpetrated when the complainer is on the ground, trying to fend off attacks from a number of angles, where you are seen to adjust your body to maximise the force of the blows, the stamps in particular. The footage was rightly described by Mr Roy who appeared when the plea was tendered, as disturbing; it was sickening and reprehensible; you acted in such a way as to show total indifference as to whether or not the complainer died; the attack was of such severity that it could easily have led to death.

The effect on the complainer has been life changing; on presentation he had numerous injuries including swelling bruising and lacerations and a visible deformity of the jaw; he suffered a skull fracture on the upper left side of his head and a small haemorrhage around his brain. He suffered a traumatic brain injury. Fortunately he did not require surgery, but his cognitive functioning, concentration, information processing and memory have been affected by the injury. He had to leave college, not only interrupting his course but interrupting the peer relationships with fellow students; he suffers migraines, fatigue and ongoing pain. He had to stop work, returning only to part time work. He has had to give up the gym.

It has given rise to ongoing stress, depression, feelings of worthlessness, and concerns about the family members who were there; it has affected relationships. So no area of his life has been unaffected by your selfish and inexplicable actions that evening.

In determining the appropriate sentence I take into account the matters which I have mentioned. You will of course receive credit for having pled guilty at a very early stage, as I understand it, as soon as the footage had been provided in a playable formula.

There is no alternative but a substantial period of detention to reflect the serious violence inflicted on the victim. It was, as the plea recognises, a potentially murderous attack: sustained, targeting the head and using full force blows. And it is a matter of pure luck that the injuries were not worse; it was not through any restraint on your part; the victim thought that he was going to die.

Had you not pled guilty I would have imposed a sentence of 11 years' detention. As a result of your plea I will modify that to a sentence of 7 years and 6 months, to be served from the date of your detention on 6 September 2024."