||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 368 (Nov)
|| EWHC 2624 (QB)
||Queen's Bench Division
||28 November 2005
Sentence - Mandatory life sentence - Murder - Minimum term - Whether offender to have oral hearing - Whether offender's minimum term ought to be reduced - , Sch 22, para 3.
There was no need for an oral hearing of the review of the offender's minimum term under para3 of Sch22 to the . An application under para3 of Sch22 to the 2003 Act was not an occasion for the applicant to dispute his guilt. Nor was it appropriate for an examination of his motive. Furthermore, a reviewing judge should not hear evidence as to the offender's remorse. There was also no requirement to have an oral hearing to consider medical evidence. On the facts, there should be no reduction of the minimum term.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary