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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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.
Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.
HMA v Jamie Cameron
Aug 9, 2021
On sentencing Judge John Neil McCormick made the following statement in court:
"Jamie Douglas Cameron, the jury found you guilty of charges (1), (3) and (5) under various deletions.
Charge (1) involved an assault on your then partner to her injury on 9th June 2019. In that regard I note that you were then held on remand from 10th June until 16th October 2019.
Charge (3) involved an assault days after your release, namely on 20th October 2019, to the same complainer to her severe injury, to her permanent disfigurement and to the danger of her life and the jury found that you had attempted to murder your then partner. Charge (5) involved threatening and abusive behaviour on the same date at an address in Largs to which armed police officers had been summoned.
On conviction the crown asked me to consider the imposition of an Order for Lifelong Restriction.
The Criminal Justice Social Work Report assessed you as representing a very high level of risk.
You have a comparatively short but significant record including for assault to injury and permanent disfigurement, the use of weapons and a conviction for culpable homicide for which you received an extended sentence in 2014.
I have received two substantial risk assessment reports each prepared by a Consultant Clinical Forensic Psychologist, one at the instance of the court and the other instructed by defence. Standing the terms of the report instructed on your behalf, it is unsurprising that the challenge to the first report has been withdrawn.
Having considered all the information before me, including the plea in mitigation made by Mr Lenehan on your behalf, I am satisfied that the risk criteria set out in section 210E of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 have been met.
Those criteria are that the nature of the offences of which you have been convicted, either in themselves or as part of a pattern of behaviour, are such as to demonstrate that there is a likelihood that you, if at liberty, will seriously endanger the lives or physical or psychological wellbeing of members of the public at large. Having reached that conclusion I must make an Order for Lifelong Restriction.
Parliament has prescribed how I should fix the punishment part which is the period of time which must pass before you can apply for parole.
Taking into account the offences to which you were convicted on this indictment, had I not been imposing an Order for Lifelong Restriction, I would have imposed a custodial term of 12 years as part of an extended sentence.
I am required by Parliament to ignore any period of confinement which may be necessary for the protection of the public and to determine the part of that period of imprisonment which would represent an appropriate period to satisfy the requirements of retribution and deterrence. That period is 9 years.
I will follow the normal approach suggested in the legislation and reduce that period by one-half to take account of the effects of early release.
Accordingly the punishment part of your Order for Lifelong Restriction will be 4 years and 6 months which will be backdated to 24th October 2019.
The sentence imposed is not a sentence of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months. It is an Order for Lifelong Restriction which is a sentence of imprisonment for an indeterminate period, which shares some characteristics with a life sentence.
You will not be eligible to apply for parole until the punishment part has elapsed. It does not follow that you will then be released.
You will only be released from prison when the Parole Board considers that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that you continue to be held in prison."