Whole life tariff quashed  

In 2006 Stephen Ayre pleaded guilty to serious sexual offences against a 10 year old boy. At the time of the offences he was on life licence having been released from a mandatory life sentence for a 1985 murder. The judge determined that ‘life’ should mean life and declined to set a minimum term. The effect of setting no minimum term is that there would be no Parole Board review of the case in the future and Mr Ayre would die in prison without any chance of release.

It was fully accepted that Mr Ayre had committed two terrible sets of offences and it might be that he would never be released because he would remain a risk of serious harm. Nevertheless, the setting of a minimum term deals with punishment and retribution, and not risk which is a matter for the Parole Board.

The Court of Appeal therefore quashed the sentence and substituted discretionary life sentences with a minimum term of 10 years.

The Court noted that the outcome of the appeal would be largely technical, but the case is significant for a number of reasons;

1. There are currently 35 mandatory lifers with ‘whole life’ tariffs for murder. This was the only discretionary life sentence ‘whole life’ case. It will be more difficult in the future for judges to pass whole life tariffs in discretionary cases.

2. The new sentence means that Mr Ayre’s case will be monitored over time to determine whether he remains a risk. Although it is likely that he will remain so for a very long time, the new sentence does not extinguish hope. In reality he may be released as a very old man.

3. The setting of a minimum term is likely to have an effect on categorisation in the future, allowing and encouraging Mr Ayre to make progress within the system.

4. The compliance of whole life sentences with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights is very questionable.

Mr Ayre was represented in the Court of Appeal by Pete Weatherby of GCN, instructed by Tom Battarbee, of Swain and Co , Liverpool

Pete currently has another case before the ECtHR arguing that ‘whole life’ cases are incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention (Vinter v UK), instructed by Simon Creighton of Bhatt Murphy .