British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Dilks, R v [2005] EWCA Crim 2817 (14 October 2005)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2005/2817.html
Cite as: [2005] EWCA Crim 2817
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Strand London, WC2 |
||
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE GOLDRING
____________________
| R E G I N A | ||
| -v- | ||
| ANDREW MARK DILKS |
____________________
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
- MR JUSTICE GOLDRING: This appellant is 31 years old. He has been before the court on 12 occasions in respect of 21 offences. He has served significant periods in prison. He appeals against sentence by leave of the Single Judge.
- On 17th May 2001 in the Crown Court at Nottingham he was sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment for burglary and breach of an earlier licence period. He was released on licence on 28th July 2003. The licence expiry date was 28th November 2004.
- On 17th February 2005, in the Crown Court at Nottingham, on the day of trial, he pleaded guilty to offences of simple arson and escape. On 7th April 2005 he was sentenced by His Honour Pollard as follows. In respect of the breach of the licence, he was ordered to serve 6 months' imprisonment. He was ordered in respect of the arson, consecutively, to serve 7 years' imprisonment. The sentence for the escape was 3 months' imprisonment concurrent.
- The facts were these. On the evening of 21st February 2004 the occupants of a terraced house in Nottingham went out. They later received a telephone call from a neighbour that their house was on fire. When they returned they found it completely destroyed. It transpired that the appellant had gone into the premises at about 9.00 pm in the evening. He had forced a ground floor window. He poured petrol from a 9 litre can on the sofa and started a fire. At the time of the incident the police had no idea who was responsible.
- In April 2004 the appellant's mother made a statement detailing how he had admitted responsibility for starting the fire to her. He told her he had been asked by certain people to burn the house, and that people were paying him regarded the householder as 'a grass'. He claimed not actually to have started the fire because there was some sort of spontaneous ignition from the vapour combining with the boiler. It is of note that one of the occupants of the house was a police officer.
- He was arrested on 31st August 2004. He took an opportunity to escape. He did not get very far and was recaptured. He said words to the effect that he was an innocent man and therefore entitled to escape.
- There was before the learned judge a psychiatric report. It indicated that the appellant did not suffer from any major mental illness. His intellectual capabilities were at the lower end of the average spectrum.
- As to the risk of him setting further fires, it was said it was not particularly high, but if he continued to abuse drugs when he was in the community, that might well lead him to commit a variety of offences in his desperation to finance his addiction.
- The pre-sentence report referred to his apparent genuine remorse and his addiction to drugs. We have and have read reports detailing the appellant's progress on remand.
- In his sentencing observations the learned judge said that it was a very serious offence. The house was completely gutted. He would receive credit for the plea at the late stage. He referred to the fact that the appellant had a record as a burglar rather than an arsonist and it was a one-off offence to that extent. It was said by the learned judge that he did not present a high risk of setting fires.
- In our view, this was not an easy sentencing exercise. The appellant had pleaded guilty, albeit at a late stage. The offence was in the final analysis that of simple arson. The circumstances in which he agreed to set the fire were unusual. Although he has a bad record there are no convictions for arson and he is not someone with a propensity to commit arson. Not without some hesitation we have concluded that the 7 year sentence in those circumstances was too long. In substitution for it, we shall impose a sentence of 5 years' imprisonment. That will run consecutively to the 6 months for breach of licence. To that extent, this appeal is allowed.