Griffiths & Ors v R.

Griffiths & Ors v R.

The murder, though not strictly for gain, was committed in furtherance of a large-scale criminal enterprise and to enforce discipline, making its seriousness comparable to the examples in Schedule 21. The judge erred in double-counting some aggravating factors and undervalued the absence of intent to kill. Minimum terms were reduced to reflect proper balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors and the relative culpability of each appellant.

Parties
Appellant: Lee Griffiths; Appellant: Luke Griffiths; Appellant: Thomas Griffiths; Appellant: Mark Jackson; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeals allowed in part; minimum terms reduced
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Minimum Term, Schedule 21 Criminal Justice Act 2003, Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice, Conspiracy to Supply Class a Drugs
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Minimum Term Schedule 21 Criminal Justice Act 2003 Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice Conspiracy to Supply Class a Drugs

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Griffiths

Appellant

Luke Griffiths

Appellant

Thomas Griffiths

Appellant

Mark Jackson

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the minimum terms imposed for murder were appropriate given the aggravating and mitigating factors
  2. 2 Whether the murder fell within the category of 'murder for gain' under Schedule 21 Criminal Justice Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether the judge double-counted aggravating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The murder, though not strictly for gain, was committed in furtherance of a large-scale criminal enterprise and to enforce discipline, making its seriousness comparable to the examples in Schedule 21. The judge erred in double-counting some aggravating factors and undervalued the absence of intent to kill. Minimum terms were reduced to reflect proper balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors and the relative culpability of each appellant.

Court Disposition

appeals allowed in part; minimum terms reduced

Orders

  • Lee Griffiths: minimum term reduced to 30 years
  • Luke Griffiths: minimum term reduced to 23 years