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 Thomas McGarva
Apr 1, 2025
On sentencing, Lord Harrower said:
"Thomas McGarva, on 28 February 2025, at the High Court in Glasgow, you tendered a plea of guilty under section 76 procedure to an indictment libelling a single charge of assault and robbery of a post office. This is your sixth offence involving a post office. According to the social work report that I have received, you would appear to take little personal responsibility for your offending. On this occasion, you have even blamed the local authority’s housing department for placing you in a tenancy where you could see the post office from your kitchen window.
The circumstances of the offence are as follows. The complainer was working alone on 21 January 2025, when you came into his shop, shouting, 'open the post office', and carrying what appeared to be a small pistol. You dragged the complainer into the post office area of the shop, pulled out a bag and began to fill it with money. The complainer tried to stop you, and in the struggle, you pushed him up against a wall. However, he managed to extricate himself and run out of the shop, shouting for help. He also managed to lock the door behind him with you still inside. When you began hitting the glass door of the shop with a screwdriver, the complainer pulled down the shutter, before going round to lock the back door, ensuring you were trapped. When the police arrived, you told them you only had a screwdriver, but the CCTV showed you hiding the firearm within a fridge. The police also recovered from within the post office area a plastic bag containing £1,140 in cash. But for the bravery of the complainer, you might have escaped with a substantial sum of money.
You are now 46 years old. I have already mentioned your previous convictions involving post offices. Some of these were aggravated by reason that they involved the use of a weapon, such as a hammer or a knife. The hand gun you brandished in the commission of this offence was in fact an airsoft pistol and is not classed as a firearm under the relevant legislation. However, it does have the appearance of a firearm, and would be classed as an imitation firearm. Your use of it in the commission of this offence not only put the complainer in fear of his life, but required the attendance of armed police officers.
I have taken account of everything that has been said by Mr Dryden in mitigation. Until the apology issued today on your behalf, you showed little or no insight into the harm caused to the complainer. You appear to treat the prospect of prison as an occupational hazard. I am satisfied that the level of your culpability in relation to this offence is high, as is the degree of harm caused. In order to achieve the sentencing purposes of punishment, deterrence, and public protection, a lengthy custodial sentence is necessary, followed by a further lengthy period of supervision in the community.
I will therefore impose an extended sentence. That sentence will be in two parts, a custodial part and an extension period. The custodial part will be 56 months, reduced from 7 years to take account of the timing of your plea. The extension period will be 3 years. During that period, you will be subject to licence conditions to be set by or on behalf of the Scottish Ministers. If you break the terms of your licence you will be liable to be recalled to custody to serve the remainder of your sentence. The sentence will be backdated to 22 January 2025 when you were remanded in custody."