R v Hersh Osman
[2024] EWCA Crim 854
R v Leroy Jethro Gibbs-Higgins (aka Terry Waymark)
18 June 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 791
Court of Appeal
A man pleaded guilty to arson after setting fire to his girlfriend's letterbox. The court said his guilty plea meant the conviction was fair, and his sentence (a long prison term) was justified because of his past crimes and the seriousness of his actions.
Key Facts
- •Leroy Jethro Gibbs-Higgins (also known as Terry Waymark) pleaded guilty to arson.
- •He set fire to sheets of paper in the letterbox of his girlfriend's flat.
- •The fire was started with bank statements belonging to a person living at a different address.
- •Gibbs-Higgins gave conflicting accounts of events to his girlfriend and the police.
- •CCTV evidence and witness statements from pest control workers contradicted his account.
- •Police found bank statements related to the fire at Gibbs-Higgins' hotel room.
- •Gibbs-Higgins had 22 prior convictions for 72 offences, including previous arson convictions.
Legal Principles
Appeals against conviction following a guilty plea require demonstrating the conviction was unsafe. A guilty plea is a public admission of facts, establishing conviction safety unless special circumstances exist.
R v Tredget [2022] EWCA Crim 108, [2022] 4 WLR 62 (CA) at [148]-[178]
Sentencing guidelines for arson consider culpability (medium or high) and harm caused (categories 1-4). Aggravating factors (e.g., prior convictions, lies, domestic context) and mitigating factors affect sentencing.
Sentencing Council guideline for arson (cited but not explicitly detailed)
Extended determinate sentences can be imposed for dangerous offenders.
Relevant legislation (not specified)
Outcomes
Leave to appeal against conviction refused.
The applicant's grounds of appeal were deemed without merit. His guilty plea, given freely and with understanding, and the strong circumstantial case against him, rendered the conviction safe.
Application for an extension of time to appeal against sentence refused.
The sentence was considered appropriate given the aggravating factors (high culpability, premeditation, significant prior convictions, lies, domestic context) and lack of significant mitigation. The judge's findings were not faulted, and the extended determinate sentence was justified.