High Court of Justiciary
| Author | Robert Shiels |
| Published date | 01 February 1995 |
| Date | 01 February 1995 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002201839505900102 |
| Subject Matter | High Court of Justiciary |
HIGH
COURT
OF
JUSTICIARY
CULPABLE HOMICIDE BY THROWING OR
POURING
SULPHURIC ACID
McIntyre v
HM
Advocate
Douglas Murray Mcintyre was indicted for murder to the High Court of
Justiciary sitting at Perth in January 1994.
It
was alleged that in September
1993 in a house in Dundee he assaulted a man to his injury and also
assaulted his mother by throwing or pouring concentrated sulphuric acid
on her head and body whereby she was so severely injured that she died a
short time later in hospital. After trial the jury unanimously convicted the
accused of assault on the man and by a majority convicted the accused of
the culpable homicide of his mother. The accused was sentenced to 20 years'
imprisonment. He appealed against the sentence on the statutory ground
that it was excessive, reported at 1994 G.W.D. 28-1687.
Counsel for the appellant submitted that a sentence of 20 years' imprison-
ment did not give proper recognition to the difference between a conviction
for murder and a conviction for culpable homicide. Whilst this period of
imprisonment wasnot lifeimprisonment the distinction was not a meaningful
one in the present circumstances. Counsel listed various factors which
cast doubt on the question whether the appellant appreciated the full
consequences of what he wasdoing.
In the opinion of the appellate judges where an assault has resulted in
grave injuries and a lingering death in circumstances of extreme discomfort
then a long sentence of imprisonment must follow. This crime was in its
nature a horrifying one. However, the appellant was acquitted of the crime
of murder so that this appeal was to be approached as one of culpable
homicide on the view that the degree of recklessness was less than that
required for murder. In the circumstances a long sentence was essential in
order to mark the gravity of what the appellant did but that 14 years was to
be substituted for the original term.
CROWN TO DETERMINE PROSECUTION
Huston v Buchanan
David Huston and 12 others were charged by the Procurator Fiscal at Elgin
with a breach of the peace arising out of a protest at a football match. When
their case was called in the Sheriff Court objection was taken by the solicitor
for the accused to the proceedings on the basis that a local newspaper had
carried a report from the police that no action was to be taken against the
accused.
In determining the plea in bar of trial the Sheriff heard evidence that the
policemen who had reported the incident to the Procurator Fiscal had then
been instructed to investigate the matter: such instruction being given on
statutory authority. In tracing and interviewing the accused under caution
22
To continue reading
Request your trial