R v Rebecca Thompson
[2023] EWCA Crim 1244
R v Josephine Iyamu
31 October 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1658
Court of Appeal
A woman was ordered to pay back money made through crime. She tried to appeal, saying some of the money wasn't from crime. The court said she didn't prove it, so they upheld the original order to pay back the money.
Key Facts
- •Josephine Iyamum was convicted of trafficking five Nigerian women and witness intimidation, receiving an 18-year sentence.
- •A confiscation order of £183,806.06 was issued.
- •The applicant sought an extension of time to appeal the confiscation order.
- •The appeal challenged the calculation of the benefit figure, focusing on bank deposits (£22,930), a property in Benin City (£171,368.09), and the benefit from the trafficking victims (£21,387.38).
- •The applicant claimed some deposits were gifts or legitimate income, the Benin City property was partially owned, and the victim benefit figure was inaccurate.
- •The judge considered the applicant to have a criminal lifestyle and applied the assumptions under section 10 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).
Legal Principles
Criminal Lifestyle and Assumptions under POCA 2002
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA)
Burden of Proof in Confiscation Proceedings
POCA 2002
Outcomes
Application for extension of time to appeal refused.
The grounds of appeal lacked merit and would not have succeeded.
Bank Deposits (£22,930): Included in benefit figure.
Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to rebut the assumption that the deposits were proceeds of crime. The judge was entitled to reject her testimony due to lack of supporting documentation and inconsistencies.
Benin City Property (£171,368.09): Partially included in benefit figure.
While the land purchase predated the offending, the judge found that the building was likely constructed during the period of criminal activity. The applicant failed to provide evidence of construction date or legitimate funding. The judge apportioned 75% of the property value to the building, considering the risk of injustice in including the full value.
Victim Benefit Figure (£21,387.38): Upheld.
The judge's assessment of the victim benefit figure based on trial evidence was deemed accurate.