Publication of the week: George Mawhinney

George R. Mawhinney, “Sentencing murders done for gain: the Court of Appeal and Schedule 21” [2015] 3 Current Sentencing Practice News 8

There has been relatively scarce thematic analysis of the statutory sentencing guidelines for murder’s operation. This article explores the interpretation and application of one aspect of those guidelines comprising Criminal Justice Act 2003 Sch.21, through a systematic review of Court of Appeal judgments. The guidelines break murder down into seriousness categories, for which a starting point is specified by Parliament for each, much like Sentencing Guidelines Council / Sentencing Council guidelines. Paragraph 5 stipulates a starting point of 30 years for murders of ‘particularly high seriousness’, and sets out in para.5(2) some scenarios that will normally be of such gravity. One such is a murder ‘done for gain’.

Mr Mawhinney’s research has found the approach towards para.5 generally has been notably more liberal than that of other seriousness categories. Nowhere has that been more stark than in sentencing murders for gain. Time and again, minimum terms fixed from the 30-year starting point suggested for such offences have moved below that starting figure, but rarely above it. This pattern suggests the courts are subtly diluting Parliament’s weighting of such murders for gain as being of ‘particularly high’ seriousness.

George Mawhinney joined the Law School in September 2013 having previously taught for the University of Oxford at numerous colleges, at UCL, Oxford Brookes, and Buckingham itself. He recently passed his viva for the DPhil in Law at Oriel College, Oxford, and is a member of the Centre for Criminology there. His doctoral thesis, supervised by Prof. Andrew Ashworth, centres on statutory sentencing provisions and their application by the Court of Appeal. His academic interests encompass criminal law, criminal justice, criminology, and constitutional law. His first article, on criminal liability for contagion of illnesses, was published in 2013 and has been cited by the Law Commission as well as featuring on reading lists at Oxford University and elsewhere. Amongst other things, he has written questions for the LNAT, worked as a research assistant to Prof. Julian V. Roberts and Prof. Barry Mitchell, and is a barrister and double scholar of Middle Temple.