Hardy, R. v

Hardy, R. v

Given the murder of three victims, the sexual and sadistic nature of the crimes, and the aggravating circumstances, a whole life order is necessary as a finite term would not suffice for retribution and deterrence.

Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: Anthony John Hardy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing and Minimum Term Determination
Outcome
whole life order imposed; no minimum term set
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Whole Life Order, Minimum Term, Diminished Responsibility
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Whole Life Order Minimum Term Diminished Responsibility

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Anthony John Hardy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing and Minimum Term Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a whole life order should be imposed on Anthony Hardy for the murder of three victims
  2. 2 Whether any minimum term before eligibility for release should be set

Ratio Decidendi

Given the murder of three victims, the sexual and sadistic nature of the crimes, and the aggravating circumstances, a whole life order is necessary as a finite term would not suffice for retribution and deterrence.

Court Disposition

whole life order imposed; no minimum term set

Orders

  • Anthony Hardy shall never be released from prison; a whole life order is made.