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.

Read more about civil judgments.

HMA v Bailey Dowling & Benjamin Wilson

 

May 26, 2025

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lord Matthews sentenced Bailey Dowling to life imprisonment for the murder of Lewis McCartney. The punishment part, the time which must be spent in custody before parole is considered, was set at 15 years. Lord Matthews sentenced Benjamin Wilson to a Community Payback Order for two years for assault.


On sentencing, Lord Matthews said: 

"Bailey Dowling, on 17 April you were convicted of the murder of Lewis McCartney, a young 18 year old who had everything to live for and whose loss has left an incalculable void in the lives of his family and friends.

Your own life has now been changed forever by what you did but that is your responsibility.

Had you not stabbed him, Lewis would hopefully have gone on to full maturity, perhaps married, had children and gone on to live a long happy and productive life. The fact that he has been robbed of that is a far greater tragedy than the consequences to yourself.

What happened was brought out in the evidence at your trial. It is clear that you came to Edinburgh for what you hoped would be an enjoyable time and so it would have been but for decisions which you made.

When a number of young people, including Lewis McCartney, came to the flat where you were, an atmosphere developed and you intervened to stand up for your friend who was on the end of verbal abuse.  That would have been fine had it ended there. It led to the group leaving the flat. However, according to the evidence, you threatened the deceased. Whether that was true or not, once the other party had left you had no need to do anything.

Instead you left the flat when they phoned and suggested that you go with them, ostensibly to buy drugs. You said that you had suspicions about them but instead of staying where you were, in safety, you armed yourself with a knife and joined them outside. Taking a knife into the street is never acceptable and always carries a risk of death or serious injury. In evidence when asked if you would have done anything differently in view of what transpired, you said you would not, claiming that the others would somehow have got into the flat if you had not left it.

In any event, once outside the evidence as to what happened next was not uniform. The preponderance of the evidence was that you were struck with a bottle by Benjamin Wilson and reacted by striking out at Lewis with the knife, in what you said was self- defence, he having effectively circled behind you. There was also evidence that Benjamin Wilson only struck you because you had already produced the knife but given his conviction it is likely that the jury accepted that you were struck first.

What is clear is that the jury were satisfied that you neither acted in self-defence nor were provoked but instead committed the heinous crime of murder.

For the crime of murder there can only be one punishment and that is imprisonment for life.

However, I have to fix a period, known as the punishment part of the sentence, which must pass before you can apply for parole. Whether you are successful in being released on licence will be a matter for the Parole Board but even then you will be subject to recall for the rest of your life.

I have taken account of all the circumstances, the contents of the Criminal Justice Social Work Report and everything urged on me by your Counsel. Given your age, the guideline on Sentencing Young People applies and the punishment part will be shorter than it would have been had you reached the age of 25.

The sentence of imprisonment for life on charge 1 will run from 17 April of this year. I fix the punishment part at 15 years. On charge 3 I sentence you to detention for 2 years, to run concurrently.

Benjamin Wilson

The jury rejected your account that you acted in self-defence, which seems to me to be an indication that they were satisfied that you struck the first blow. Whether that is correct or not, I am told that you originally appeared on summary complaint.

In your case I have also considered all of the circumstances, the report and your Counsel’s submissions, I am satisfied that an alternative to custody would be appropriate and I propose, if you agree, to impose a Community Payback Order for a period of two years."