Tag: Age

The Court of Appeal considered the relevance of age and the long delay between the commission of the offences and sentencing.

Age of Criminal Responsibility, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST), June 2018 The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology have published a note which considers whether the current age of criminal responsibility is appropriate by exploring international legal standards, scientific research on mental and moral development and alternative approaches to dealing with children in conflict […]

R (on the application of M) v Hammersmith Magistrates' Court (2017), Divisional Court, Unreported A youth court, who had deemed the claimant to be 18 for the purposes of criminal proceedings, had not made proper enquiries into the claimant's age as is required by section 99 Children and Young Persons Act 1933. A visual asessment was not sufficient or appropriate.

The treatment of young adults in the criminal justice system: Seventh Report of Session 2016-17: House of Commons Justice Committee This report about young adults in the criminal justice system is a helpful reminder to the judiciary, lawyers and other youth justice professionals that adolescent brain development and children's immaturity has a direct impact on criminal behaviour and has implications for how they should be treated in the criminal justice system.

R v Finnerty (Daniel Mark) [2016] EWCA Crim 1513 In this case the Court of Appeal quashed an extended sentence given to a 16-year old. He had previously undiagnosed ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. In the court’s judgment, it considered that the appellant’s young age was of particular importance when it came to sentencing and that generally a child should be dealt with less harshly than an adult offender.

Court of Appeal's consideration of the objective test within unlawful act manslaughter.

R v Marcus Petrie [2014] EWCA Crim 2912 Successful appeal against sentence and Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) imposed on a 19 year old who had pleaded guilty to causing a 13 year old child to engage in sexual activity and sexual activity with a child. The sentence was reduced on the grounds that the starting point for the original sentence had been too high because the appellant’s social immaturity affected his culpability and there were concerns about his vulnerability.