SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Lord Scott said:

“Dawid Tadeusz Majewic, you have pled guilty to the crime of culpable homicide by killing Jacek Dembinksi on 27 August 2024, just over 7 months ago.  You did this by struggling with him, thereby inflicting or otherwise causing blunt force trauma to his head, striking him on the arm with a knife and failing to summon emergency medical assistance for him, all in consequence of which he died on 29 August 2024 at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary.

There are no Victim Impact Statements in this case.  I am told that the closest family member of Mr Dembinksi, his brother, is unwell in hospital and unable to provide one.

In any event, it is obvious that any violent death will have a significant impact on the family and friends left behind.

Nothing said or done here today, and no sentence I impose, will be enough to help Jacek Dembinksi’s family and friends with the devastating loss of a loved one.

Before passing sentence, I asked for a Justice Social Work Report.  This was with a view to finding out more about your background and any other relevant information.

You gave the author of the report broadly the same account as in the agreed narrative.  I must emphasise that, by your plea, you have accepted that you were not acting in self-defence at the time.  I will proceed on the basis of the agreed narrative which means that the killing was not premeditated and occurred in your own home in response to unexpected aggression and violence by Mr Dembinksi.  The origins of whatever argument led to Mr Dembinksi’s death appear to have been in the excessive consumption of alcohol by you both.

Obviously being under the influence of alcohol is no excuse whatsoever for what you did.

In the risk assessment, it states: ‘If Mr Majewic is unable to identify his triggers and receive support to address these then the risks of reoffending are considered to be high.’ That is how things stand at the moment.  As the report says, you have ‘been unable to identify any triggers [yourself] therefore [have] not engaged in relevant support for this.’

I note that you might now be ready to accept help with what is obviously a problem with alcohol.  It is very much in your interests, as well as those of wider society, that you do so.

You are 43 years of age.  I note that you have several previous convictions, including 3 for violence.  Of these, based on description in the schedule of convictions and disposal, the most serious appears to be the conviction from 8 December 2017 for assault to severe injury and permanent disfigurement.  You avoided custody on that occasion, being sentenced to a CPO instead.  I note also that you have previously been sentenced to imprisonment for breaching bail and threatening behaviour.  Importantly, your criminal history means that it cannot be said that this serious incident was out of character for you.

I have considered all that has been said on your behalf by Mr Moggach, in particular that you have always accepted responsibility for the death of Jacek Dembinksi.  I will proceed on the uncontradicted basis that Mr Dembinksi offered you violence before you struck him.  You sustained only minor injury and what you did appears to have been grossly disproportionate to what he did to you but the killing was not premeditated.  I will reflect that in selecting the starting point or headline sentence before making a reduction for your plea of guilty.

In summary, I have considered all that is said in the Justice Social Work Reports and all that has been said today on your behalf by your counsel.  The main consideration in sentencing is the loss of life caused by your actions and decisions.

I must and will recognise the timing of your offer to plead guilty and that you did so using the accelerated procedure specifically designed to facilitate early pleas.  This allows me to reduce the custodial part of the headline sentence or starting point because of what is referred to in court as the utilitarian value of your plea, that is primarily the saving of court time although a plea of guilty has other benefits too.  In mitigation, the main consideration is the plea of guilty which allowed the case to be resolved without a trial, although there are other factors I have already mentioned.

Having regard to the whole circumstances of the case, only a custodial sentence is appropriate.  It is necessary to punish you and to seek to deter you and others from behaving in this way and to protect the public from you.

Having reflected carefully on all of the circumstances, in particular the serious nature of the charge, the established violent and aggressive behaviour and the insights in the justice social work report, including in the risk assessment, in my judgement the normal period of licence would not be enough to protect the public from serious harm from you.  Accordingly I consider that the custodial sentence in your case should be by way of an extended sentence.

If you had been convicted of this charge after trial, the custodial term of the sentence would have been 8 years.  I have reduced that period by approximately 30% to take account of the timing of your plea of guilty.

The custodial sentence will be an extended sentence of 8 years.  The length of the custodial term of that extended sentence is 5 years 4 months with a 2 year 8 month extension period for the duration of which you will be under licence on conditions fixed by the Scottish Ministers.  If during this extension period you fail to comply with the conditions of your licence it may be revoked by the Scottish Ministers and you may be returned to custody for a further period.

The sentence will date from 29 August 2024."