R v Kastercum
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE |
| Judgment Date | 17 January 1972 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1972] EWCA Crim J0117-3 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 4284/C/71 |
| Date | 17 January 1972 |
[1972] EWCA Crim J0117-3
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Widgery)
Lord Justice Phillimore
and
Mr. Justice Lawson
No. 4284/C/71
MR. J. WILKINSON appeared as Counsel for the Appellant.
This Appellant pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court last August to one count of robbery and one of assault on a Constable; he was sentenced to four years and one year respectively on those two counts, the sentences to be consecutive making a total of five years.
It was a bad case of robbery. The victim was a gentleman who managed a scrap metal merchantos business in Woolwich, and he normally took from his house a substantial. sum of money which he required to have available in the course of his business in order to make purchases. The sum in question on the day of the offence was £240. It is evident that this Appellant and another had become acquainted with the habit of the Manager of taking this money with him, and laid plans to attack him and rob him; on the 16th June that is exactly what they did. The Manager of the scrap metal merchants arrived in his lorry with his brief case and £240 in the brief case. He saw two men standing nearby as he stopped his lorry in the scrap yard, and when he got out of his lorry he was set upon by these two men. Each carried a hammer and he was attacked and hit on the back of the head; fortunately he was not seriously injured, indeed he was well enough to get up and get in his lorry and go off in search of the men who attacked him. They were seen; a Police Constable joined in the case, and this Appellant attacked the Police Officer. It is not clear at what moment one of the two hammers lost its head and it may be that he was attacked by the shaft of the hammer only and the injuries may thereby have been less serious than they might have been.
The Appellant is 28 years of age, a married man with one child, his wife having left him. He has three previous convictions for dishonesty, including two breaking offences, and what is perhaps rather more significant in the context of this case is that in December 1969 he was fined for an assault on the Police and in April 1970 for two cases of assault...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PP v Firdaus bin Abdullah
...3 SLR (R) 250; [2005] 3 SLR 250 (refd) Purwanti Parji v PP [2005] 2 SLR (R) 220; [2005] 2 SLR 220 (refd) R v Peter John Kastercum (1972) 56 Cr App R 298 (refd) R v Torr [1966] 1 WLR 52; [1966] 1 All ER 178 (refd) Sim Gek Yong v PP [1995] 1 SLR (R) 185; [1995] 1 SLR 537 (refd) Subagio Soehar......
-
Tan Kheng Chun Ray v PP
...of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) in Singapore). The English Court of Appeal observed in R v Peter John Kastercum(1972) 56 Cr App R 298 at 299-300 that: [W]here several offences are tried together and arise out of the same transaction, it is a good working rule that the s......
-
Public Prosecutor v Law Aik Meng
...applied sensibly, the Court of Appeal in V Murugesan v PP [2006] 1 SLR 388 (“V Murugesan”) also referred to the case of R v Kastercum (1972) 56 Cr App R 298, where the English Court of Appeal had considered the principles for determining whether sentences for convictions of a substantive of......
-
Public Prosecutor v Han Ong Guan @ Han Ong Juan and Jeremy Han Wan Kwang
...the Court of Appeal in V Murugesan v PP [2006] 1 SLR 388 (“V Murugesan”) also referred to the case of R v Peter John Kastercum (1972) 56 Cr App R 298, where the English Court of Appeal had considered the principles for determining whether sentences for convictions of a substantive offence a......