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.

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 Nicky Robertson

Jan 14, 2026

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lord Weir imposed an extended sentence of 12 years on Nicky Robertson. Sentence includes a 9 year custodial term and an additional 3 years on licence in the community. The offender pled guilty to firearms offences.

On sentencing, Lord Weir made the following comments:

"On 11 December 2025 you tendered pleas of guilty to a s.76 indictment, containing three charges under the Firearms Act 1968 and a single charge of culpable and reckless conduct involving the shooting of three rounds of ammunition from a Glock handgun through a ground floor window of an address in Niddrie Marischal Crescent, Edinburgh.

The incident was captured on images subsequently recovered and the footage, with the shots distinctly audible, was played in court on the last occasion. The agreed narrative discloses that, whatever you yourself knew, the householder was at home at the time. Police attending subsequently observed bullet holes in the living room wall and kitchen door.

Your weapon was a self-loading pistol of unknown manufacture, in the fashion of a Glock handgun, a prohibited weapon under s.5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968 and capable of firing 9mm Luger bulleted cartridges.

In determining a sentence which is fair and proportionate to the circumstances narrated, the court has regard to a number of established parameters, including the Principles and Purposes of Sentencing and Sentencing Process Guidelines published by the Scottish Sentencing Council. The court also has available to it guidance from the Sentencing Council for England and Wales on firearms offences.

In considering that material I require to have regard broadly to the seriousness of the offences to which you pled guilty but also reflect in the sentence imposed relevant mitigating factors, and that I have sought to do in your case, with the assistance of the submissions of Mr Stewart and the contents of the Criminal Justice Social Work Report and risk assessment prepared in advance of this hearing.

Seriousness

The seriousness of the offences is self-evident from the agreed circumstances in which these crimes were committed. In respect of the firearms offences, I am bound to take account of the nature of the weapon and ammunition involved, the admitted duration of your possession, the fact that the gun was self-evidently in working order and capable of inflicting potentially lethal violence, and that (by obvious inference) it was ultimately intended to be used unlawfully. In respect of charge 4, the potential for serious harm is, and ought to have been, obvious.

It is a matter of significant concern that, notwithstanding a High Court conviction for attempted murder with a shotgun, committed when you were around 21 years old, and the period you will have spent in custody thereafter, you – a 39 year old – are back in the same court, this time on a charge of repeatedly discharging a gun in public.

I note that you have other recent solemn convictions on your record.

Whatever may have been your motivation (and the one proffered on your behalf does you no credit) the use of a firearm on the public streets in this way was brazen and intolerable. The court must do what it can to deter you, and others, from such dangerous and unlawful methods of dispute resolution.

Mitigation

In considering factors mitigating sentence, I have considered all that has been said on your behalf this morning and the contents of the Criminal Justice Social Work Report.

In particular, I have considered carefully all that Mr Stewart has stated on your behalf today and on the last occasion about your motivation for doing what you did and your individual circumstances.

I have also taken into account your expressions of regret to the social worker about your behaviour and the very real risk of harm you now recognise as being associated with it. I also acknowledge that, consistent with the narrative now before the court, none of the charges is aggravated by reason of involvement in organised crime. As I will come on to explain I take account of your early plea of guilty to this indictment.

Sentence

Firearms offences

Drawing these complicated strings together, I deal first with the statutory firearms offences. In respect of charge 1, but for your guilty plea, the sentence I would have imposed would have been one of 6 years’ imprisonment. The law requires me to make allowance for that plea of guilty. But the law also mandates a statutory minimum sentence of 5 years for offences of this kind and that, accordingly, is the sentence I impose in respect of charge 1.

In respect of each of charges 2 and 3 I impose sentences of 12 months, both reduced from 18 months to reflect your plea of guilty. Each of those sentences will be served concurrently and will commence from 25 April 2025, on which date you were remanded in custody.

Culpable and reckless discharge of a firearm

In respect of charge 4, this I regard as a separate and distinct charge resulting from your decision not just to have a handgun and ammunition in your possession, but to then go on and use them on 20 March 2025 in the manner that you did. I am also satisfied, having regard to the risk assessment contained in the background report and your record of violence, that an extension to that sentence under section 210A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 is necessary to secure the public from serious harm when you are released.

Accordingly, in respect of charge 4, I will pass an extended sentence of 7 years, which is in two parts.

The first part of the sentence is an immediate period in custody. Had you not pled guilty to this indictment I would again have imposed a sentence of 6 years’ imprisonment. I take account of that plea by reducing the custodial term to one of 4 years which will be served consecutively to, so after, the sentence I have already imposed on charge 1.

But this immediate period in custody is not the end of your sentence in respect of charge 4. The second part of your sentence will be served in the community.

From the date of your release, you will be under licence for an extension period of 3 years. The conditions of your licence will be fixed by the Scottish Ministers. If during this extension period you fail to comply with the conditions of your licence, it may be revoked and you may be returned to custody for a further period in respect of this case. The court also has power to deal with you if you commit another offence after your release and while you are on licence."

14 January 2026