R v Thomas Alan Speed & Ors

R v Thomas Alan Speed & Ors

The court held that the trial judge's direction on the agreed fact regarding the electricity supply at the property did not render the conviction unsafe, as the issue was peripheral and did not materially affect the jury's assessment of the evidence. However, the court found that the sentencing judge failed to make a sufficient downward adjustment for totality when imposing consecutive sentences for firearms and drug offences. Accordingly, the sentences were quashed and substituted with reduced terms to reflect a modest adjustment for totality, resulting in lower aggregate sentences for each appellant.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Thomas Alan Speed; Appellant: Scott Fitzgerald Roseau; Appellant: James John Salkeld
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals against sentence allowed; appeal against conviction refused; sentences quashed and substituted with reduced terms.
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Possession of Prohibited Weapons, Possession of Ammunition, Supply of Controlled Drugs, Sentencing, Totality Principle, Attribution of Evidence
Criminal Law Conspiracy Possession of Prohibited Weapons Possession of Ammunition Supply of Controlled Drugs Sentencing Totality Principle Attribution of Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Thomas Alan Speed

Appellant

Scott Fitzgerald Roseau

Appellant

James John Salkeld

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on agreed facts regarding electricity at the property relevant to attribution of criminal conduct
  2. 2 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive due to insufficient adjustment for totality

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the trial judge's direction on the agreed fact regarding the electricity supply at the property did not render the conviction unsafe, as the issue was peripheral and did not materially affect the jury's assessment of the evidence. However, the court found that the sentencing judge failed to make a sufficient downward adjustment for totality when imposing consecutive sentences for firearms and drug offences. Accordingly, the sentences were quashed and substituted with reduced terms to reflect a modest adjustment for totality, resulting in lower aggregate sentences for each appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeals against sentence allowed; appeal against conviction refused; sentences quashed and substituted with reduced terms.

Orders

  • Mr Speed's sentence reduced from 28 years to 26 years' imprisonment.
  • Mr Roseau's sentence reduced from 22 years to 20 years' imprisonment.