This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/may/20/joss-stone-plotters-jail-sentences-reduced
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Joss Stone murder plotters' jail sentences reduced | Joss Stone murder plotters' jail sentences reduced |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| The jail sentences of two men who plotted to rob and kill the pop singer Joss Stone have been reduced by the appeal court. | The jail sentences of two men who plotted to rob and kill the pop singer Joss Stone have been reduced by the appeal court. |
| Kevin Liverpool, who seen as the instigator of the extraordinary – and in many ways shambolic – conspiracy, was originally jailed for life and told he would have to spend a minimum of 10 years and eight months before he could be considered or parole. On Tuesday, the appeal court reduced his minimum term to six and a half years. | Kevin Liverpool, who seen as the instigator of the extraordinary – and in many ways shambolic – conspiracy, was originally jailed for life and told he would have to spend a minimum of 10 years and eight months before he could be considered or parole. On Tuesday, the appeal court reduced his minimum term to six and a half years. |
| Junior Bradshaw, described in court as the "foot soldier", had his 18-year jail term reduced to 10 years. Because the pair served lengthy spells in custody before their trial, the ruling means Liverpool will be eligible for parole in three years' time and Bradshaw could be free in two. | |
| The court took into account the fact that Stone appeared to have suffered no physical or psychological harm. She did not hear about the plot until after the pair had been arrested. However, the court rejected the argument by Liverpool's team that the plot was so clumsy and badly planned that it did not warrant a life sentence. | |
| Explaining the court's reasoning, Mr Justice Bean said Liverpool had conspired to murder Stone with an "array of weapons". Even after the pair had been involved in a car accident as they drove to Stone's home, they had persisted. | |
| The judge added: "When coupled with the finding that the appellant [Liverpool] poses a high risk of serious harm to the public, it leads to the clear conclusion that a life sentence was justified." | |
| Bean said Bradshaw was "of exceptionally low intellectual capacity". Had he been more intelligent, "he would have realised that the chances of a successful and profitable robbery were so remote as not to be worth attempting," the judge said. The court concluded that because Liverpool's sentence had been reduced, so should Bradshaw's. | |
| The pair drove to the West Country from their home in Manchester in a car containing weapons including a samurai sword, hammers and a chisel. They intended to find Stone's home in Devon, rob her of £1m that they believed she had in a safe, decapitate her and dump her body in a river. | The pair drove to the West Country from their home in Manchester in a car containing weapons including a samurai sword, hammers and a chisel. They intended to find Stone's home in Devon, rob her of £1m that they believed she had in a safe, decapitate her and dump her body in a river. |
| Police stopped Liverpool, 35, and Bradshaw, 32, after Stone's neighbours reported seeing them acting suspiciously, and the pair were found guilty at Exeter crown court last year. | Police stopped Liverpool, 35, and Bradshaw, 32, after Stone's neighbours reported seeing them acting suspiciously, and the pair were found guilty at Exeter crown court last year. |
| In mitigation, Bradshaw's lawyer argued that the defendant had "fundamental intellectual impairment" and was easily influenced by others. But the judge, Francis Gilbert QC, said the jurors' verdict showed they believed that Bradshaw knew full well what was the purpose of the trip to Devon. | In mitigation, Bradshaw's lawyer argued that the defendant had "fundamental intellectual impairment" and was easily influenced by others. But the judge, Francis Gilbert QC, said the jurors' verdict showed they believed that Bradshaw knew full well what was the purpose of the trip to Devon. |
| The judge said Bradshaw had the "capacity to join in the conspiracy to murder for purposes of obtaining money", and told Bradshaw: "Liverpool was the instigator and you were the foot soldier, you were a party to what he intended to do." | The judge said Bradshaw had the "capacity to join in the conspiracy to murder for purposes of obtaining money", and told Bradshaw: "Liverpool was the instigator and you were the foot soldier, you were a party to what he intended to do." |
| The case had elements of a sinister farce. The trial heard that the would-be killers crashed as they drove to the scene of their planned crime and later got lost and had to ask for directions. They made no real attempt to hide an arsenal of weapons packed in their battered old Fiat Punto, and helped detectives enormously by detailing their scheme to kill the singer – real name Jocelyn Stoker – in a bundle of notes, one of which said: "Once Jocelyn's dead, find a river to dump her." | The case had elements of a sinister farce. The trial heard that the would-be killers crashed as they drove to the scene of their planned crime and later got lost and had to ask for directions. They made no real attempt to hide an arsenal of weapons packed in their battered old Fiat Punto, and helped detectives enormously by detailing their scheme to kill the singer – real name Jocelyn Stoker – in a bundle of notes, one of which said: "Once Jocelyn's dead, find a river to dump her." |
| Liverpool becomes eligible to apply for parole in December 2017, but the appeal judge said that did not mean he would be released then. "Far from it. The significance of the minimum term is that it specifies that the parole board will only be able to consider for the first time in late 2017 whether the appellant can safely be released," Bean said. | |
| "The assessment of future risk is a matter for the parole board and not for this court. We have already noted the many references in the reports on Liverpool to the need for him to be observed for a substantial period of time before a conclusion can be reached on the level of risk which he poses. The purpose and effect of a sentence of life imprisonment is that if it is never considered safe for the offender to be released, he may remain detained for life, and that if he is ever released it can only be on licence and subject to supervision." |