Key Facts
- •Stephen Kelvin Rule pleaded guilty to two counts of theft from his brother and son.
- •The theft involved proceeds from the sale of a property (£259,500), totaling over £249,000 after fees.
- •Rule misused the inheritance money, initially claiming investment, later admitting to using it.
- •He purchased a property for his wife using some of the stolen funds.
- •Rule's health (stroke in 2023) and potential plea bargain discussions were considered.
- •Full compensation was eventually made after sentencing.
- •He was sentenced to 2 years and 9 months' imprisonment for Count 1 (concurrent 15 months for Count 2).
Legal Principles
Sentencing guidelines for theft, considering factors like amount stolen, breach of trust, planning, and mitigating circumstances (age, health, character).
Sentencing Note; Theft Act 1968, section 1(1)
Appeals against sentence can be based on grounds of manifest excessiveness or being wrong in principle. A prosecution assurance, if given, generally isn't grounds for appeal after a guilty plea.
Case Law (implied)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court found the sentence, while stern, was not manifestly excessive. The judge considered mitigating factors but was entitled to impose a higher sentence given the significant aggravating factors (amount stolen, breach of trust, planning). The argument regarding a potential pre-trial prosecution assurance was deemed invalid.