[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Boot, Re review of tariff [2016] EWHC 1363 (Admin) (09 May 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2016/1363.html Cite as: [2016] EWHC 1363 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

		Royal Courts of Justice
		09/05/2016

Introduction

1. This is the review of a minimum term imposed on a person convicted of murder who was under 18 at the time of the offence and who was sentenced to detention during Her Majesty's Pleasure. The House of Lords in R (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 51; [2006] 1 AC 159 held that the tariff for a person sentenced to detention during her Majesty's Pleasure may be reduced on reconsideration if there is clear evidence of exceptional and unforeseen progress. The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice have agreed to honour any recommended reduction in tariff made by this court.

Background

2. On 25th March 2010, Aaron Raymond Boot, born on 31st July 1991, was sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's pleasure. He had been convicted of the murder of Paul O'Brien. The assault took place on 8th January 2009 and Mr. O'Brien died on 11th June 2009.
3. In passing sentence Mr Justice Blair specified a minimum term of 11 years, less 373 days spent on remand. That term is the period during the parole board will not consider whether he should be released on licence.
4. At the date of the murder, Aaron Boot was 17 years and 10 months old. He was 18 years and 8 months at the time sentence was passed. He is now almost 25 years old. He has served approximately 6 years of the specified term.
5. The offence was described by the Judge as a vicious attack on an older man, "in no position to stand up to you". The victim was not vulnerable by reason of age or disability. There had been a prolonged and vicious beating, including stamping on the victim. He had suffered severe brain injuries and died months later, never having regained consciousness. The Judge found no statutory aggravating features. In mitigation he found that there was no intention to kill. He took account of age and an exceptionally damaging background in reducing the term to 11 years.

Progress during sentence

6. Aaron Boot had a number of previous convictions and was described, at the time of sentence in a pre-sentence report dated 23rd March 2010, as "a very damaged young man". The difficult circumstances of his childhood and adolescence were set out in detail. At the time of sentence he was identified as posing a high risk of serious harm to the public.
7. On his admission to prison and for some years afterwards he continued to deny his guilt. It is clear that he found it difficult to adjust to custody and was treated for depression. There were some issues of non-compliance but no major incidents recorded.
8. The real step forward came in 2015 when he completed the Resolve course. He participated and engaged well. He showed that he had understood and could put into practice the skills taught as part of the programme. He had begun to appreciate the consequences for others and himself of his previous violent and uncontrolled behaviour. He recognised how significant a part alcohol had played in his offending.
9. It was reported that he "will benefit from applying tools such as the 'Change, Accept, Let Go' tool and 'Thought Stopping' to reduce the likelihood of acting on his hostile thinking." There are recommendations of other courses which are considered to be of potential benefit. This shows considerable progress but identifies scope for even more improvement.
10. No submissions have been made by or on behalf of Mr Boot.
11. I have seen a short and dignified letter from Mr. Kevin O'Brien, the deceased's brother, about the continuing effect of the loss has had, and continues to have, upon him.

Criteria

12. There are three possible grounds on which to reduce the specified term:

i) The prisoner has made exceptional progress in prison, resulting in a significant alteration in the detainee's maturity and outlook since the commission of the offence, and a significant reduction in the level of risk posed to public safety. The exceptional progress must have been sustained over a lengthy period of time and in more than one establishment.

ii) The prisoner's welfare may be seriously prejudiced by his continued imprisonment in a way that cannot be safely managed in custody.

iii) There is a new matter which calls into question the basis of the decision to set the term at a particular level.

Conclusion

13. In the absence of representations I have considered all aspects of this review and have set out the criteria I have to apply. There are no welfare issues or any complaint about the original term specified. I therefore deal solely with the question of whether there has been "exceptional progress" sustained over a lengthy period of time.
14. There is no doubt that Mr Boot has made very real progress. He has worked hard and effectively to gain the most from the help he has been offered. His acknowledgment of responsibility for killing Mr O'Brien was the first step but it was a very big step.
15. The starting point for improvement did not come until after Mr Boot had admitted his guilt. Since then there has been a very marked change for the better. Mr Boot has made extremely good progress and his participation in the Resolve course shows a growing maturity and ability to deal with difficult challenges. There are very many reasons to be optimistic that this change is the start of a continuing improvement. However it is not right to describe the undoubted improvement as exceptional and, so far, it has not been sustained for such a lengthy period that a reduction of the term can be recommended.