A judge may decide to publish a statement after passing sentence on an offender in cases where there is particular public interest; where a case has legal significance; or where providing the reasons for the decision might assist public understanding.

Please note that statements may include graphic details of offences when it is necessary to fully explain the reasons behind a sentencing decision.  

Follow us if you wish to receive alerts as soon as statements are published. 

Once charges are spent, any statement in relation to them is removed and cannot be provided or acknowledged. Statements published before the launch of the website may be available on request. Please email

The independence of the judiciary is essential to safeguard people’s rights under law - enabling judges to make decisions impartially based solely on evidence and law, without interference or influence from the government or politicians.

When deciding a sentence, a judge must deal with the offence that the offender has been convicted of, taking into account the unique circumstances of each particular case. The judge will carefully consider the facts that are presented to the Court by both the prosecution and by the defence.

For more information about how judges decide sentences; what sentences are available; and matters such as temporary release, see the independent Scottish Sentencing Council website.

Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.

Read more about civil judgments.

HMA v Frank Mayne


Jun 26, 2020

At the High Court in Edinburgh today Lord Pentland imposed an Order for Lifelong Restriction on Frank Mayne after the offender was found guilty of a catalogue of sexual and violent offences committed over a long period of years against vulnerable women and children.

On sentencing, Lord Pentland made the following statement in Court: 

“Frank Mayne, you were convicted by the jury of a horrific catalogue of sexual and violent offences committed over a long period of years against women and children. You also pled guilty to the possession of indecent images of children.

All of your victims were vulnerable at the time you attacked and sexually abused them. Two of them were children in respect of whom you were in a position of trust; you groomed and then repeatedly abused them. 

Your other victims were your partners. You behaved in a merciless way towards them, extending on one occasion to raping your victim at knife point.

Each of your victims deserves great credit for the courage they have shown in coming forward and testifying against you.

You have a bad record of previous offending. This includes a conviction for sexually abusing a 5 year old girl.

The evidence satisfies me that you have a sadistic, violent and depraved personality.  In my considered judgement you present a serious risk to public safety, particularly the safety of women and girls.

Having regard to the gravity of these offences and to your record of previous offending, it is clear that the court must take an extremely serious view of these convictions.

I accept the opinions expressed by the two accredited risk assessors in their comprehensive reports. Both assess you as presenting a high risk to public safety, particularly the safety of women and girls. It is of great concern that you are sexually attracted to female children and unable to control your urges, especially whilst under the influence of alcohol, to which you are strongly addicted. As Dr Baird observed, when you are in the community you have a significant lack of capacity for internal controls and self-management. Dr Johnstone, in the report commissioned on your behalf, concludes that the nature, seriousness and pattern of your behaviour show that you have an enduring propensity seriously to endanger the safety of the public through sexually violent and violent behaviour. She considers that the potential for change is very limited, if it exists at all.

On the basis of the abundant evidence available to the court, I am entirely satisfied that in view of your paedophiliac and sexually violent tendencies the risk criteria are met. An order for lifelong restriction is necessary and appropriate to protect the public from the serious harm you present. This is a sentence of imprisonment for an indeterminate period. I shall impose such an order in respect of all the charges of which you have been convicted on the present indictment taken together.

The law requires me to set a minimum term of imprisonment (referred to as the punishment part of your sentence). This is the minimum period you must serve before the Parole Board for Scotland can, in the future, consider your case.

Had I not been minded to make an order for lifelong restriction, I would have imposed an extended sentence in respect of all the charges taken together. The custodial term of this sentence would have been 14 years and the extension period 6 years. The public protection element would have been met by the extension period imposed for that specific purpose. The result, under the applicable legislation, is that the punishment part for the purposes of the order for lifelong restriction is 7 years – one half of the 14 year term. To take account of your pleas of guilty, I will reduce that to 6 years.

I emphasise that this is no more than a minimum period. It certainly does not signify that you are likely to be released at that stage or indeed ever. That, as I have said, will be for others to decide.

Your life sentence will be backdated to 4 February 2019 when you first appeared in court in connection with the present offences.

You will remain subject to the notification requirements applicable to sex offenders for the remainder of your life. Your name has been added to the list of persons deemed unsuitable to work with vulnerable groups.”

26 June 2020