Humble, R. v

Humble, R. v

Given the uniquely serious and carefully planned nature of the offences, which had the intended effect of corrupting and diverting a major murder investigation, the severe sentence imposed was not wrong in principle or clearly excessive, and personal mitigation factors were outweighed by the gravity of the conduct.

Parties
Appellant: John Samuel Humble; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Sentencing, Mitigation, Guilty Plea, Remorse, Passage of Time
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Sentencing Mitigation Guilty Plea Remorse Passage of Time

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Samuel Humble

Appellant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for perverting the course of justice was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
  2. 2 Whether the guilty plea, remorse, and passage of time should have mitigated the sentence

Ratio Decidendi

Given the uniquely serious and carefully planned nature of the offences, which had the intended effect of corrupting and diverting a major murder investigation, the severe sentence imposed was not wrong in principle or clearly excessive, and personal mitigation factors were outweighed by the gravity of the conduct.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal against sentence dismissed