R v Sean John Nancarrow
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Popplewell |
| Judgment Date | 17 January 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] EWCA Crim 470 |
| Docket Number | No: 2018 00214 A1 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Date | 17 January 2019 |
[2019] EWCA Crim 470
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Holroyde
Mr Justice Popplewell
HER HONOUR JUDGE Wendy Joseph QC
(Sitting as a Judge of the CACD)
No: 2018 00214 A1
Ms H Marshall appeared on behalf of the Appellant
Mr J Sank appeared on behalf of the Crown
The appellant is aged 51. On 15th December 2017 he was sentenced by Mr Recorder Price QC in the Crown Court at Reading for the following offences to which he pleaded guilty: count 1, possessing prohibited firearms, namely four CS gas canisters, contrary to section 5(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1968, two years' imprisonment; count 2, possessing disguised firearms, namely five stun guns disguised as mobile phones, contrary to section 5(1A)(a) of the Firearms Act 1968, five years' imprisonment; count 3, possessing a disguised firearm, namely an electrified knuckle-duster, contrary to section 5(1A)(a) of the Firearms Act 1968, five years' imprisonment; count 4, possessing extreme pornographic images, namely eighteen videos depicting bestiality, fifteen months' imprisonment. All sentences were to run concurrently.
He appeals against sentence with leave of the Full Court granted following an oral renewal of the application for permission which had been refused by the single judge.
The essential ground of appeal is that the sentences on counts 2 and 3 were wrong in principle or manifestly excessive because the Recorder ought to have found that there were exceptional circumstances which justified not imposing the statutory minimum term of five years for those offences.
The facts are these. In the summer of 2015, the appellant had been living for a number of years at a house in Bracknell with the owner, Miss Kalsi, initially as her partner and, following the cessation of their relationship, as a lodger. On 27th May 2015 he was involved in an incident of domestic violence with her, for which he was later charged and convicted of battery. He moved out of the house and left most of his belongings there.
About a month later, as a result of an incident at the house in which the appellant was not involved, the police attended on 25th June 2015, and again about a week after that. On searching the house, they found the items that form the subject matter of the current appeal. Four CS gas canisters, four stun guns disguised as mobile phones and the electrified knuckle-duster were found inside a silver briefcase in the garage. A fifth stun gun disguised as a mobile phone was found in a gun cabinet in the garage. All but one of the stun guns were found to be in working order. Only one of them was charged. That was one of the mobile phone stun guns in the silver case.
On 24th May 2015, shortly before he had moved out of the home, the appellant had sent a text to another man saying: “Hav u stil got my stun guns that you took or hav u sold them cos I need them back[?]”
The defendant was arrested in late September 2015 and answered “no comment” to all questions. There was then a long delay (which was not of the appellant's making), until he was reinterviewed in March 2017, when he again answered “no comment” to all questions. Shortly thereafter he was jointly charged along with Miss Kalsi and indicated not guilty pleas on his first appearance before the magistrates' court. We have been told that the reason for the lengthy delay was for the purposes of the police examining mobile phones and computers in the context of the images of bestiality which had been found and which formed the subject matter of count 4.
The appellant pleaded guilty at the PTPH on a written basis of plea which was not accepted by the Crown. The written basis was as follows. He had ordered the stun guns and the CS gas canisters over the internet from China in two consecutive orders shortly after he had moved to new accommodation in Maidenhead between 2009 and 2010. He had done so because he thought that that was a high crime area and he felt unsafe. There were two such orders, he said, because he had thought that the first order was not going to arrive and had therefore placed a second order. Apart from unpacking the stun guns and checking that they were operational, he said they had been kept since then in their packaging inside a metal case without the plug adapters that would have been necessary to charge them. Following that basis of plea, the proceedings were dropped against Miss Kalsi; and on 15th December 2017 the appellant appeared before the Recorder for a Newton hearing and for sentencing. The Recorder had the benefit at that stage of a psychiatric report from Dr Lally dated 21st November 2017 and of a pre-sentence report from the probation service.
The psychiatric report gave details of the appellant's history of mental illness and alcoholism, which had largely dated from the period since 2006, when he had become the carer for his brother. His brother had been suffering from depression and alcoholism, and was often aggressive or suicidal. It was the appellant himself who found his brother when, in 2008, he hanged himself with cable ties, as a result of which the appellant suffered post traumatic stress disorder with flashbacks and nightmares. Dr Lally's conclusions were summarised in paragraph 4 of his report in the following terms:
“The defendant suffers from:
a) Recurrent depressive disorder, current episode moderate severity.
b) Harmful use of alcohol;
c) Post traumatic stress disorder;
d) Agoraphobia.
His problems have become increasing chronic, complex and severe over the last ten years and I think the prognosis for recovery is poor. I doubt he would cope in a custodial environment and he would be a high risk of self-harm and suicide. His mental disorders are not currently of a nature or degree to warrant treatment in hospital and I do not recommend a mental health disposal.”
The author of the pre-sentence report expressed the view that any risk of harm posed by the appellant could be effectively managed in the community with an alcohol treatment requirement and a rehabilitation activity requirement.
The appellant gave evidence at the Newton hearing before the Recorder on 15th December 2017. The Recorder rejected his evidence as to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Kelly Anne Smith
...a holistic approach will need to be taken bearing in mind all the circumstances of the case in accordance with the case of Nancarrow [2019] EWCA Crim 470. However, he goes on, in the light of the clear guidance at paragraph 25 of Dixon and even considering the health of the offender and th......
-
R v Michael Allan Grim
...[2020] TCACA 21 11 [2006] All ER (D) 387 (Mar) 12 CR 11/2019 at paragraph 26 13 CR 21/22 at paragraph 9 14 [2009] EWCACrim 1683 15 [2019] EWCA Crim 470 16 [2006] EWCA Crim 87 17 [2005] EWCA Crim 2056 19 CR 12/2023 at paragraph 24 20 (1964) 7 WIR 459 at pages 460-461 21 At page 461 22 (......
-
R v Mia Peers
...the effect of section 51A and Parliament's intent. 22 More recent cases on this topic include R v Beaman (supra) and R v Nancarrow [2019] EWCA Crim 470 but they add nothing of relevance on the particular issue we have to decide. Furthermore, although it is necessary to consider the issue o......
-
R v Alec Keith Nash
...Judge of the Supreme Court 1 (2006) 1 Cr. App. R 77 2 (2007) WL 1685269 3 CR-AP 13/2019 [2020] TCACA 21 4 [2009] EWCA Crim 1683 5 [2019] EWCA Crim 470 6 [2006] EWCA Crim 87 7 [2005] EWCA Crim 2056 8 (1964) 7 WIR 459 at pages 460-461 9 Page 461 ...