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 Kieran Abercrombie, Robert Thomson, Kenzie Gardner, Tyler Ramage

 

Mar 10, 2026

At the High Court in Edinburgh, Lord Mulholland sentenced Kieran Abercrombie, Robert Thomson, Kenzie Gardner & Tyler Ramage to between 4 years detention and 9 years imprisonment. They pled guilty to varying degrees of firebombing a business, 2 cars in the driveway of a private dwelling, plotting to firebomb another private dwelling and possession of a stun gun. All aggravated by being involved in serious organised crime.

On sentencing Lord Mulholland made the following remarks in court:

"You all pled guilty to varying degrees of firebombing a business, firebombing 2 cars in the driveway of a private dwelling, plotting to firebomb another private dwelling and possession of a stun gun.  The background to all of this is that it was part of a gangland war as the serious organised crime aggravation attests to.  If that was not serious enough, the taxi premises in charge one was in operation and two employees were working there at the time.  You could quite easily have been facing a murder charge had the fire taken a different course. 


For charge 2, the firebombing of two cars, this was carried out in the driveway of a house occupied by a family.  Children were in the house at the time.  You were masked and this was carried out in broad daylight.  The plan was to cause the fire to spread.

For charge 3, the plan was to firebomb more cars at a different address in Edinburgh, another private dwelling.  The plan was being developed and arrangements made for transport to carry out the offences, discussing which vehicle to use and which route to take.  Fortunately, you were stopped before the plan came to fruition. 

For charge 4, which only applies to you Thomson, you had a stun gun in a suitcase in the garage. 

Not only was all this in furtherance of a gangland war, you were receiving payment for your nefarious work.  Gangsterism is never acceptable in a civilised society.  The public won’t accept it, law enforcement won’t accept it and the courts won’t accept it.  There is a heavy price to pay for those caught doing this criminality and you are about to pay that price.

In sentencing you, I take into account the nature and circumstances of the criminality, the terms of the CJSWR, your criminal records for the two of you who have criminal records, everything said on your behalves including the testimonials lodged on behalf of you Thomson, and your ages for those who are under the age of 25 years.  I should add that in respect of the Sentencing Young People guideline, the criminality here had little to do with a lack of maturity as the criminality was planned well in advance, was for money and was in furtherance of serious and organised crime.  It was sheer naked gangsterism, pure and simple. 

I also take into account the timing of your pleas of guilty and the benefits that brings to the criminal justice system as a whole. 

Kieran Abercrombie – Had you not pled guilty when you did, I would have sentenced you to a cumulo sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment.  Taking account of the timing of your plea of guilty, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 9 years’ imprisonment. I apportion 12 months’ imprisonment to the serious organised crime and bail aggravations (charges 1, 2 and 3).  I order that the sentence should run from 26 May 2025, the date you were first ordered into custody by the court for these matters.  I also make a serious crime prevention order (SCPO) in the terms agreed for 5 years effective upon your release from prison.

Robert Thomson – Had you not pled guilty when you did, I would have sentenced you to a cumulo sentence of 10 years’ detention.  Taking into account the timing of your pleas of guilty, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 6 years and 8 months’ detention.  I apportion 12 months’ detention to the serious organised crime and bail aggravations (charges 1, 2 and 3).  I order that the sentence should run from 12 February 2026, the date you were first ordered into custody by the court for these matters.  Had I required to sentence charge 4 on an individual basis, the sentence would have been 6 months’ detention. 

Kenzie Gardner – Had you not pled guilty when you did, I would have sentenced you to 8 years’ detention.  Taking into account the timing of your pleas of guilty, I sentence you to a cumulo sentence of 5 years and 4 months’ detention.  I apportion 6 months’ detention to the serious organised crime aggravation (charges 1 and 2).  I order that the sentence should run from 12 February 2026, the date you were first ordered into custody by the court for these matters.

Tyler Ramage – Had you not pled guilty when you did, I would have sentenced you to 6 years’ detention.  Taking into account the timing of your pleas of guilty, I sentence you to 4 years’ detention.  I apportion 6 months’ detention to the serious organised crime aggravation (charge 2).  I order that the sentence should run from 12 February 2026, the date you were first ordered into custody by the court for this matter.  I make an order that in respect of your electronic tag, you have served 81 days of the sentence. “