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 Irvine
Aug 12, 2026
Upon sentencing, Lord Harrower made the following remarks:
"Thomas Irvine, on 6 July 2026, you pleaded guilty under s76 procedure, to two charges. The first is a charge of assault to the severe injury and permanent disfigurement of another man, endangering his life. The second is a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
In the early evening of 16 April 2026, the complainer was walking towards Aurs Drive in Barrhead, carrying bags in both his hands. You approached him, carrying a knife behind your back. What happened next was captured on CCTV in a recording that was played in court.
Charge 1
As the complainer drew closer, you lunged forward and stabbed him. In the struggle that ensued, you pushed the complainer to the ground, and while standing over him, you continued to stab him several times, causing injury to his left side, buttocks and lower leg. The assault only came to an end when a member of the public stepped in.
Charge 2
Interviewed later by police officers, you claimed it was the complainer who had attacked you. You appeared to have sustained injuries to both your legs, and you were taken to hospital for treatment. Unfortunately for you, however, a member of the public had observed you inflicting these injuries upon yourself before running away from the scene of the assault.
Discussion
I must assess the seriousness of your offending by reference to culpability and harm.
So far as culpability is concerned, this was a sustained and armed assault on a defenceless man carried out in broad daylight. You deny premeditation. But the fact that you were carrying a knife in a public place suggests a significant degree of planning, as does your boasting remark - 'I’ve got him' - overheard immediately after the incident.
As to harm, the complainer was taken to Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, where three stab wounds were closed with stitches. He also underwent exploratory surgery to his left leg. He has provided a statement describing the continuing psychological impact of your attack upon him. Quite apart from these injuries to the complainer, your pathetic attempt to shift the blame for this incident onto him wasted the valuable time and resources of both the police and hospital staff.
Sentence
Thomas Irvine, you are now 51 years’ old. You have a history of violent offending. The most serious convictions for assault took place while you were still a young man. But you were convicted again of assault in 2018, and more recently for offences of threatening or abusive behaviour, aggravated by reason that they involved the use of a knife. According to the social work report prepared for this hearing, you have been assessed as presenting with a medium risk of re-offending.
I have taken account of everything said on your behalf by Mr Mitchell. Had I been sentencing you after trial, I would have imposed a sentence of imprisonment, in cumulo in respect of both charges, of 8 years. Taking account of the early stage at which you pleaded guilty, that sentence will be reduced to 5 years and 4 months, backdated to 20 April 2026, when you were remanded in custody."
12 August 2026