Leading Criminal Lawyer Explains John Cross ABH Sentence

Показать описание

Criminal defence solicitor Joseph Kotrie-Monson talks to LBC Radio’s Andrew Castle about John Cross’ sentence for domestic assault at Nottingham Crown Court. Was it too lenient? What would the judge take into account? Can the prosecution appeal the sentence if they think it is too low? Joseph explains the whole process.

20th February 2022 LBC Radio

Notes of interview:

This was a horrific sounding and sustained attack over two separate days. Was it a lenient sentence? Maybe but just as maybe not, even though that sounds like a lawyer’s answer. He could arguably have been charged with burglary, but the facts aren’t clear enough to know whether the CPS undercharged him for practical or economic reasons as often happens.

A major problem is that the case is quite underreported. It appears to have come from a syndicated local Nottingham journalist’s article. We know nothing of the mitigation or background, only of the incident itself.

But we have to start with the law he was charged and pleaded guilty and it’s ABH, which is an assault resulting in a moderate amount of physical harm. If it was worse it would be GBH and a serious sentence. Once someone pleads guilty, often in these cases with mental health issues as mitigation, a judge is hamstrung in sentencing higher, and often do not result in prison. If there’s objection, look to the CPS charging it at that level (if the physical harm was in fact worse) or look at the politicians who make the laws that judges follow.

If the CPS still felt that this was a lenient sentence, there is a mechanism under the ‘unduly lenient sentences’ rule where the Attorney General, currently Suella Braverman, can refer a case for reconsideration to the Court of Appeal. Cases that are reported in the press are often revisited in the Court of Appeal where there is a public outcry. Whether or not this sentence is one that will end up there, we simply don’t know.