Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v BGW

[2023] EWCA Crim 1198
A teenager was given a long prison sentence for kidnapping. Because of his mental health problems and the difficulties he faces in prison, the court reduced his sentence, but he still has to serve a significant amount of time.

Key Facts

  • The appellant, a 17-year-old at the time of the offences, was convicted of two counts of conspiracy to kidnap, two counts of conspiracy to commit false imprisonment, and two counts of conspiracy to blackmail.
  • The offences involved two separate kidnapping episodes of the same 17-year-old male victim, stemming from a £500 debt.
  • The second kidnapping involved greater violence, threats, and humiliation, lasting approximately 36 hours.
  • The appellant was sentenced to concurrent extended sentences of 15 years and 6 months (10.5 years custody and 5 years extended license).
  • The appellant appealed on grounds of excessive sentence reduction and disparity with co-defendants' sentences.
  • New medical reports highlighting the appellant's PTSD, ADHD, and the severe impact of custody on his mental health were submitted during the appeal.

Legal Principles

Youth sentencing guidelines; consideration of age, maturity, vulnerability, and impact of punishment.

Youth Sentencing Guidelines, R v ZA [2023] EWCA Crim 596

Sentencing offenders with mental disorders; impact of custody on offenders with mental health conditions.

Sentencing offenders with mental disorders, developmental disorders or neurological impairments guideline

Extended sentences for specified offences; availability of extended sentences for different offences.

Sentencing Act 2020

Outcomes

Appeal partially allowed. The determinate sentence was reduced.

The court considered the new medical evidence demonstrating the severe impact of custody on the appellant's mental health, warranting a further reduction beyond the initial one-third reduction.

The determinate sentence of 10.5 years was reduced to 8 years on counts 1, 4, 7, and 9 (kidnapping and false imprisonment).

The court applied a one-half reduction from the adult starting point of 16 years due to the appellant's age, vulnerabilities, and the extreme difficulty he faces in custody.

The extended sentence on counts 8 and 10 (blackmail) was quashed and replaced with an 8-year determinate sentence.

Blackmail is not a 'specified offence' under Section 255 of the Sentencing Act 2020, therefore an extended sentence was unlawful.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.