SENTENCING STATEMENTS
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 judicialcomms@scotcourts.gov.uk.
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.
HMA v Aly Albosati
Jan 16, 2026
Sheriff Ralph made the following comments in court:
"Aly Albosati you have pled guilty to a contravention of s.2B of the Road Traffic Act. That is a charge of causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving. What that means is that your careless actions on the 16 June 2023 caused the death of Patricia Marshall.
Patricia Marshall was 74 years of age and had been happily married for 57 of those years at the time of her death. Both she and her husband were keen cyclists, and for about 40 years they had toured the highways and byways of the UK and Europe together. She was clearly a much loved wife, mother, grandmother and great grandmother. It is clear that her death and the manner of her passing has had a profound effect on her family. The extent of their loss is evident from the measured and dignified victim impact statements provided to the court, that speak eloquently of just how much she was loved and relied on for love, support and advice by those around her and that she is missed every day.
In approaching sentencing in this case. Let me first state at the outset of the sentencing process that no size of penalty can adequately reflect or compensate for the loss suffered from this tragic incident. Patricia Marshall and her husband Reginald who was also injured, ought reasonably to have been able to assume that they were safe to cycle together on that day, as they had done countless times before. It is difficult to comprehend the devastation that all who knew her must have felt on learning of the distressing circumstances of her death.
I have considered the sentencing guidelines produced by the Scottish Sentencing Council contained in the Statutory Offences of Causing Death by Driving guideline, and I see no reasons to depart from that guidance.
In applying the sentencing guideline to this case I consider that the seriousness of the offence here falls into a Level B offence – that is careless driving that arises from more than momentary inattention but is not driving that falls just short of dangerous driving.
In reaching that conclusion I have had regard to the fact that the approach to the gentle right hand bend that you faced was a long straight and you therefor should have been aware of the change in direction required to safely navigate the bend well in advance of the turn. That you struck the grass verge was your first mistake but it was then compounded by your attempt to compensate which resulted in you steering in the other direction which caused you to lose control and your vehicle to cross the carriageway and cause the collision. It is not lost on the court that you had only passed your test a month earlier.
Having established that the offence falls within a Level B, the sentencing guidelines then state that the appropriate sentence is a Level 2 community payback order.
I am next required to select the headline sentence which is appropriate for this offence. In order to do that I am required to balance aggravating factors, such as the fact that Mrs Marshall was a vulnerable road user against mitigating factors such as your relative lack of a criminal record, your appropriate actions to assist at the scene, your expressions of remorse, your acceptance of responsibility in your plea and through your agent and the effect that the offence has had on your mental health and the curtailing of your studies.
As a result, I have arrived at a headline sentence in this case of 240 hrs of unpaid work which will be modified, as a result of your plea, to a period of 180 hours. I note what is said in the Report about the benefit that may be available to you through supervision and I intend to impose a period of supervision of 1 year.
I also require to disqualify you from driving. The period I have selected is a headline disqualification of 30 months which will be modified for your plea to a period of 20 months.”
16 January 2026