https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com

Making it happen. Holding officialdom to account. Frank, fearless and free. THE DIGITAL NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH BLOG. Join our conversation https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com YOU MAY NOW VIEW PETERBOROUGH TRIBUNE OVER A SECURE WEB LINK: https://parkfarmneighbourhoodwatch.blogspot.com PASS IT ON!

PBROtrib PAGEview COUNTER excludes casual browsers scrolling through a selection of posts

Friday, October 31, 2014

R v Lowe (Puppy Farm Murder) Sentencing Remarks by Mr Justice Singh 31 October 2014

Library Picture
 
 
In the Crown Court at Guildford
R v Lowe
Sentencing Remarks by Mr Justice Singh 31 October 2014

[The defendant may remain seated for the time being].

1.  You have been convicted by the jury of the murder of Christine Lee and Lucy Lee on 23 February 2014 at Keepers Cottage Stud near Farnham in Surrey. You have also been convicted of the possession of a firearm (a shotgun) with intent to endanger life.

2.  You are and were at the time 82 years of age and a man of previous good character. You lived at the cottage for some 45 years and had been in the business of breeding dogs and dealing in horses as well as other work. Your partner of many years died in the spring of last year and this clearly had a traumatic effect on you.

3.  You had known Christine Lee (aged 66) for some 25 years and had had a relationship with her on and off during that time.  After the death of your partner, Christine Lee felt sorry for you and wanted to come to your cottage to look after you. She moved to the cottage in September last year and was staying there in February this year. Her daughter Lucy Lee (aged 41) was also staying from time to time at the cottage to help her mother and to help you look after the animals at your property.
 
continued......

 
4.  You are a man well used to handling and firing shotguns.  You had a licence to keep the shotgun in question.

5.  On the morning of Sunday 23 February you lost your temper and took your shotgun out of its locked cabinet and used it to kill Christine Lee.  She died of  a single shotgun wound to the chest fired at close range at an angle from above. Lucy Lee was able to use her mobile phone to make a frantic and desperate call to the emergency services on 999.  She said that you had shot her mum and that she feared that you were going to shoot her as well. Nevertheless in an act of extraordinary courage, she went back; no doubt to see if there was anything she could do to help her mother.  You then used the shotgun to shoot her twice, once to the back of the head and then fatally to the chest, again from an angle from above.  In the meantime you must have had to reload your weapon because it had two barrels.

6.  You then set about doing what you had planned to do all along, which was to put down four dogs at the premises.  

7.  I have taken into account the personal impact statements from Christine Lee’s sister Julia and her daughter Stacey, in so far as they were read in court.  It is clear that the murders of Christine and Lucy Lee have had a terrible and continuing impact on them and the other members of the family.
Count 3

8.  I will deal first with Count 3, possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life.  The maximum sentence for this offence is life imprisonment.  In the circumstances of this case I consider that the appropriate sentence is 10 years imprisonment and that sentence will be concurrent to the minimum terms which must be imposed for the two offences of murder in Counts 1 and 2.
Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003

9.  Turning to Counts 1 and 2, there is only one sentence which the law permits me to pass upon you:  that is a sentence of life imprisonment.  I am required to specify the minimum term which you must serve before you can be considered for release on licence by the Parole Board.  
 
10.  In setting the minimum term I must have regard to the provisions of Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, in particular paragraph 5.  Where the court considers (as I do in the present case) that the seriousness of the offence (or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it) is particularly high, the appropriate starting point in determining the minimum term is 30 years.  As paragraph 5(2) makes clear, cases that would normally fall within the category whose seriousness is particularly high include: 
(b) a murder involving the use of a firearm;
and (f) the murder of two or more persons.
11.  I also have to have regard to any aggravating or mitigating factors to the extent I have not already allowed for them in the choice of the starting point.
12.  I make it clear for the avoidance of doubt that I do not regard paragraph 11(a) as being relevant in the present case as a potential mitigating factor.  It was accepted on your behalf that it was not relevant.  Having heard the evidence at your trial, I have come to the clear conclusion that you did have an intention to kill both Christine Lee and Lucy Lee rather than to cause them serious bodily harm.  I form that view because of the close range with which you used the shotgun firing at their chests. I also form that view because in statements which you made to the police after the incident you said that you had had to “put them down.”
13.  The presence of an intention to kill is not in itself an aggravating factor. However, in my view, your actions went beyond that in this case and had certain aggravating features.  On the evidence heard at the trial I have formed the view that, having killed Christine Lee, you then shot Lucy Lee in the back of her head after she had made the 999 call, then reloaded your gun and pursued her outside the cottage, with the intention of making sure that this time she died.
 
14.  By virtue of paragraph 11 of Schedule 21, the mitigating factors which may be relevant in the present case include: (b) lack of pre-meditation; (d) the fact that the offender was provoked (for example by prolonged stress); and (g) the age of the offender.
15.  I accept that there was no pre-meditation in this case and take that into account.
16.  I also accept that there were features in the background to the events in this case which need to be taken into account as tending to explain, but not justify, your loss of temper on 23 February.  There was evidence at the trial, particularly from Mr Baddeley, whose statement was read, and the evidence of Mr Richardson, the partner of Lucy Lee and who was called by the Prosecution, to the effect that you felt that you were being controlled in what you could do, and that you felt frustrated and agitated as a consequence. 

17.  I turn to the question of your age.  In this context I have been referred to several decisions of the Court of Appeal: R v Walker [2005] EWCA Crim 82; R v Archer [2007] EWCA Crim 536; R v Symmons [2009] EWCA Crim 1304; and R v Troughton [2012] EWCA Crim 1520.  I have also considered the recent decision in R v Sampford [2014] EWCA Crim 1560.

18.  It was common ground before me that the position was accurately summarised as follows at paragraph 15 of the judgment in Sampford: “…clearly age is a mitigating factor.  It is a statutory mitigating factor, as is apparent from schedule 21 paragraph 11(g) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.  Advanced age will be relevant in a sentencing exercise such as the one facing [the Judge].  The schedule establishes that, as does Troughton and the other cases cited in Troughton. Neither Troughton nor any other case, nor the schedule, suggests that a court has to do what it can to ensure that a defendant does not die in prison. If nothing else, no court would be in a position to conduct the necessary actuarial exercise. Even if it were, it would not override the requirement of the sentencer to reflect the circumstances of the killing in setting the minimum term.  If those circumstances require a minimum which may result in the offender dying in prison, then that will be the minimum term.”
19.  In my view the gravity of the offences committed by you in this case needs to be properly reflected in the minimum term imposed while taking into account your old age.
20.  I have taken into account everything else that has been said on your behalf in mitigation.  In particular it is clear that you have many health problems and that you had experienced personal and financial difficulties in the last few years before these tragic events.  I have also read and considered the character references that have been placed before the court.
21.  I make it clear that I have not had regard to anything that was not in evidence at your trial or otherwise placed before me by either of the parties.
Time spent on remand
 
22.  The minimum term you will serve will have the number of days you have spent on remand deducted: on the information before me that is 248 days.
Statutory surcharge
 
23.  The legislation on surcharges applies to this case and an order will be drawn up accordingly.
[The defendant should now stand]
24.  John Lowe, the sentence of the court is 10 years imprisonment on Count 3, to be served concurrently with the other sentences.  The sentence of the court is life imprisonment on Counts 1 and 2, also concurrent.  The minimum term that you will serve is 25 years.
[The defendant can now be taken down]
     
Postscript
 
25.  I would like to thank all counsel for their assistance.

26.  I would also like to express my sympathies to the family of Christine Lee and Lucy Lee for their sad loss.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


> PETERBOROUGH TRIB NEWSREEL http://feeds.feedburner.com/BraysDuckhouseBlog
Post a Comment

P'BORO TRIB. SEARCH ENGINE

LONDON EVENING STANDARD NEWSREEL

google83466ac7cb7103b1.html]

JULIAN BRAY AVIATION SECURITY NEWS 01733 345581 UK ISDN 01733 345020


UPDATES: Post are transmitted from a variety of remote sources, immediately published on servers in the USA, additions, updates and any corrections added later on the blog version only.


Editorial policy: WE DON'T CENSOR NEWS, we will however come down hard on lawbreakers, all forms of ASB - Anti Social Behaviour, and anyone or group who seek to disturb or disrupt our neighbourhoods and communities, or in anyway abuse, take unfair advantage or financially disadvantage our citizens.

We support the Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch and digitally carry the messages from this independently resourced Neighbourhood Watch Scheme. A scheme operated following written guidelines to us directly from the Home Office.

We are openly but constructively critical of all political parties (actual and sham), pressure groups, overbearing 'jobsworths' and those who seek to waste public funds, abuse public office, ramp up expenses, BUY VOTES and/or engage in any form of directed or robotic voting.

Whilst accepting that many in Public Office perform a valuable service and make a worthwhile contribution, there are others who are frankly rubbish. Although Julian Bray is the editor, there are several Blog administrators / correspondents who actively contribute by remote transmission to this blog.

So it could be some days before the copy (content) is seen by the Editor and properly formatted. We consider all representations and correct any facts that are clearly deficient.


OUR HUMAN RIGHT TO LAMPOON AND CRITICISE POLITICIANS

THE HIGH COURT has ruled....People have a right to lampoon and criticise politicians and public officials under the Human Rights Act, the High Court has ruled.

We have the full High Court judgment, saved as a page on here. l

ampoon (lampoon) Pronunciation: /lamˈpuːn/ verb [with object] publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony, or sarcasm: the actor was lampooned by the press noun a speech or text lampooning someone or something: the magazine fired at God, Royalty, and politicians, using cartoons and lampoons.

Derivatives: lampooner noun lampoonery noun lampoonist noun Origin: mid 17th century: from French lampon, said to be from lampons 'let us drink' (used as a refrain), from lamper 'gulp down', nasalized form of laper 'to lap (liquid).

NUJ CODE OF CONDUCT

NUJ Code of Conduct

The NUJ's Code of Conduct has set out the main principles of British and Irish journalism since 1936.

The code is part of the rules and all journalists joining the union must sign that they will strive to adhere to the it.


Members of the National Union of Journalists are expected to abide by the following professional principles:

A journalist:

1 At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed

2 Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair

3 Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies

4 Differentiates between fact and opinion

5 Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means

6 Does nothing to intrude into anybody's private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest

7 Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work

8 Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge

9 Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person's age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation

10 Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed

11 A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child for a story about her/his welfare

12 Avoids plagiarism The NUJ believes a journalist has the right to refuse an assignment or be identified as the author of editorial that would break the letter or spirit of the code.

The NUJ will fully support any journalist disciplined for asserting her/his right to act according to the code

The NUJ logo is always a link to the home page.

(As modified at Delegate Meeting 2011)

PBROTRIB CHARTER


Rights Holder Charter
Version: January 2009 v.3
Introduction
This Rights Holder Charter (“Charter”) sets out the terms and conditions governing the relationship between Julian Bray, Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch blog entitled Peterborough Tribune (PBROTRIB) on the Blogger and other platforms, and an individual or company making a Contribution to PBROTRIB (“Rights Holder”). The purpose of this document is to ensure that the Charter terms are
incorporated into to all Contracts with each Rights Holder, so both parties areclear as to how PBROTRIB may use content. This Charter does not apply to content submitted:
· using a feature or interactive service that allows
the individual to upload to and display content on any of PBROTRIB websites
(including social sites), apps, WAP sites or any web address owned or operated
by PBROTRIB as may link to the terms accessible at
(User-Generated Content (“UGC”)); or
·
This Charter applies to all Rights Holder Contributions, except where the Rights Holder is already subject to a separate
written agreement with PBROTRIB in relation to Contributions, or where PBROTRIB
has agreed in writing to vary or amend the Charter due to exceptional circumstances. Formation of the Contract

By sending PBROTRIB a Contribution you are making
an offer to PBROTRIB to use the Contribution.’ PBROTRIB’s use of the
Contribution is acceptance of your offer and creates a Contract on the terms of this Charter. Submission of a Contribution by you is an acknowledgement that
you agree to the terms of this Charter. If you do not agree to the Charter you must email us as soon as possible to raise your objection and withdraw your
submitted Contribution, otherwise you will be deemed to have accepted the Charter terms.
Definitions
Contract: the agreement between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution incorporating this Charter and the Special Terms (where applicable);
Contribution: material (written, audio, visual, video or audiovisual) created by the Rights Holder and will be
classified as either Material You Send Us or Material We Request From You;
Credit: for Material You Send Us “© [insert name of Rights Holder and Year]”;
Publication: means one or more publications owned or operated by PBROTRIB. Licence: the licence granted by the Rights Holder to PBROTRIB
as set out in the Licence sections of this Charter;
Personal Data: has the same meaning as provided in section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998;
Material You Send Us: a Contribution as set out under the Material You Send Us paragraph;
Material We Request From You: A Contribution as set out under the Material We Request From You paragraph; Rights Holder: name of the of the individual or company which has created the relevant Contribution; Special Terms: written terms between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution that are not set out in this Charter and/or vary this Charter; and User-Generated Content: content submitted by an individual through a feature that allows the individual to upload material to any of PBROTRIB websites or social sites.
Conflict with other Agreements: If there is any inconsistency between any of the provisions of this Charter and the Special Terms, the Special Terms shall prevail. To be clear, where no Special Terms are agreed in writing, the Charter will apply without variation. Sending us a Contribution –
The information Rights Holders please provide To PBROTRIB When sending us a Contribution, please provide the following information:
·
Your Full Name;
Your Full Address; and Your Contact Telephone Number and Email Address.

We will not be able to provide Credits where a
Rights Holder has not provided the relevant information.

Material You Send Us

Material You Send Us is a Contribution that is
received by PBROTRIB from a Rights Holder. The Contribution may be solicited or unsolicited. The following are examples of Material You Send Us:
PBROTRIB has seen the Rights Holders’ photograph on a third party website. PBROTRIB contacts the
Rights Holder and asks to use the photograph. (Solicited). A Rights Holder speculatively submits a range of photographs to and for PBROTRIB’s use. The Editor may or may not decide to use one or more of the photographs. (Unsolicited) Material You Send Us does not include UGC, Material We Request You To Send Us or material that is governed under any
other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to accept any Material You Send Us for review and if accepted for review is under no obligation to offer a Contract. Should PBROTRIB decide that it wishes to use the Contribution, it will be governed by the terms of this Charter. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. If you wish to submit a speculative Contribution to us, please
contact the appropriate PBROTRIB title. Please note that PBROTRIB will not be able to acknowledge receipt of your Contribution and any submission is at the Rights Holder’s own risk.
Material You Send Us – Licence Terms
PBROTRIB believes that Material You Send Us is the
Rights Holder’s property and that the Rights Holder should not need to give up all its rights for the Contribution to be used by PBROTRIB. Therefore, by
sending us a Contribution, the Rights Holder grants the following irrevocable licence in perpetuity to PBROTRIB: The right to publish, reproduce, licence and sell the Contribution as part of the Publication throughout the world in the following formats:
-- the physical printed Publication;
-- in a replica layout in any electronic format of
the Publication;
-- on the website version of the Publication;
-- in any PBROTRIB apps delivering the Publication
to a reader; and
-- on any PBROTRIB social media pages.
-- The right to publish extracts or the whole of
the Publication (which may or may not include the Contribution) when promoting PBROTRIB’s business or subscriptions in media advertisement, show cards and other promotional aids. The Right to authorise The Newspaper Licensing Agency and similar reprographic rights organisations in other jurisdictions (“RROs”) to distribute or license the distribution of your Contribution throughout the world in any language(s) for RROs’ licensed acts and purposes as amended from time to time, and to keep available your Contribution through such RROs. The unlimited right to amend, edit, select, crop, retouch, add to or delete any part of the Contribution, in any format, whether electronic or otherwise, including the right to remove or amend any meta data associated with the Contribution.

The right to store the Contribution electronically.
In return for the licence granted in relation to the Material You Send Us, PBROTRIB will endeavour to provide the Credit with the Contribution. The licence granted to PBROTRIB shall survive any termination of the agreement between PBROTRIB and the
Rights Holder. Material We Request From You
Material We Request From You is a Contribution that
has specifically commissioned by PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB will contact a Rights Holder and
commission them to provide a Contribution in relation to a brief. An example of Material We Request From You is: PBROTRIB needs a photograph of a country building. PBROTRIB instructs the Rights Holder to attend the venue and take picture of the building. Material We Request From You does not include UGC, Material You Send Us or material that is governed under any other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB . The Rights Holder will provide its own equipment and materials to fulfil its obligation for Material We Request From You. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. Material We Request From You –
Assignment and Licence
PBROTRIB believes that Material We Request From You should be PBROTRIB ’s property as PBROTRIB has requested the Rights Holder’s services and instructed them to create the Contribution on its behalf. However, PBROTRIB acknowledges that the Right Holder may need a licence from PBROTRIB to
use the Contribution for limited purposes. Therefore, in submitting Material We Request From You to PBROTRIB , the Rights Holder assigns to PBROTRIB with full title, right and interest all existing and future intellectual property rights in the Contribution. In return, PBROTRIB will endeavour to give a Credit to the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB grants the Rights Holder a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence to use the Contribution in its own online and offline portfolio, provided that the following copyright notice is applied to the Contribution “©Peterborough
Tribune, used under limited licence”.
General notes about Rights: Any rights granted to PBROTRIB or the Rights Holder under this Charter shall survive termination of the Contract for any reason. Rights Holder Promises The Rights Holder promises: that it owns the Contribution and / or is (and will continue to be) authorised to grant the rights to PBROTRIB; nothing in the Contribution is blasphemous, discriminatory, defamatory, untrue, misleading or unlawful; that the Contribution complies with the NUJ Code of Professional Conduct and the Independent
Press Standards Organisations Editors’ regulations and Code of Practice; the Contribution does not contain any virus, Trojan horse, hidden computer software or similar; the Contribution does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any third party; where the Contribution contains Personal Data, all
the necessary consents in compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998 have been obtained; where the Contribution contains images of children under the age of 16, written parental consent has been obtained and can be provided on request; and maintain and comply with, at all times, the highest ethical standards in the preparation, creation and delivery of the Contribution.
Complaints In the event that a complaint is raised in relation to a Contribution, the Rights Holder agrees to co-operate fully with any internal or external investigation or process. Status. The Rights Holder is an independent contractor and nothing in the Charter shall render the Rights Holder an employee, worker,
agent or partner of PBROTRIB. The Rights Holder is responsible for any taxes/national insurance payable in relation to any services provided under the Charter.
Indemnity The Rights Holder shall keep PBROTRIB indemnified in full against all loss incurred or paid by PBROTRIB as a result of or in connection with any claim made against PBROTRIB by a third party:
arising out of, or in connection with the Contribution, to the extent that such claim arises out of the breach of this or any terms of this Charter (including any Special Terms); and for actual or alleged infringement of a third party's intellectual property rights arising out of, or in connection with the use of the Contribution except in so far as the claim arises as a result of changes made by PBROTRIB or a breach of the Licence by PBROTRIB.
Variation of the Charter No variation of any term of this Charter will be effective, unless it is set out in writing (letter, fax or email) and signed by
a relevant authorised representative of PBROTRIB. If you wish to submit a Contribution and are unable to agree with the terms of this Charter or if you
have any questions regarding this Charter, please contact a relevant authorised representative of the PBROTRIB publication.
Problems & Disputes In the event of a problem or dispute in relation to a Licence and/or in connection with this Charter, in the first instance the Rights Holder and the Editor will look to resolve the dispute amicably. Application of the Charter Unless otherwise agreed, this Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and English courts will have exclusive jurisdiction