Tag Archives: extreme pornography

Mohammed Yusuf – possible life sentence for murder, or have the Daily Mail got it wrong?

20140603-100259-36179643.jpg

Facts

On 18th October 2013 police were called to an address in Neasden after a carer had reported that one of the women she looked after had been attacked. Amoe Stevens was taken to hospital but died shortly afterwards of her injuries.

Her son in law, Mohammud Yusuf, was quickly arrested. He lived with Ms Stevens daughter (Margaret) and their two children. It was alleged that after Margaret had left the house, Mr Yusuf attacked her mother – it seems that this was not the first occasion that this had happened.

The prosecution stated that there was a sexual motive for this, and put forward evidence that Mr Yusuf had an ‘obsession with violent pornography’ and his mobile phone had ‘searches for pornographic videos showing violent rape, gang rape and incest’.

On 2nd June 2014 Mr Yusuf was unanimously convicted of murder. Sentence was adjourned until Friday.

 

What’s he going to get?

The Daily Mail state that Mr Yusuf was “warned he could face life imprisonment for the crime”. I can tell any Mail readers (and its editor) that they will be pleased – I will stake a lot of money on the fact that he will get a life sentence, as this is the mandatory sentence for murder.

The real question will be what tariff does Mr Yusuf get? We have a factsheet here, but it may be that what the Mail was talking about was that the Judge was considering a ‘whole life tariff’. Is he in line for that?

We doubt it. Looking at the comments of the Judge – “This lady suffered the most agonising death imaginable … I have never come across such a factual background of a case like this”, Mr Yusuf will get a very long tariff, but we would suggest that this is not whole life territory. It may well be a murder ‘involving sexual or sadistic conduct‘, which would give a starting point of 30 years.

We don’t know anything about Mr Yusuf’s background, but we would imagine that the ultimate tariff will be about that as it is likely that the Judge will conclude that the link is made.

It’s in our diary to have a look at again on Friday.

 

Indecent images / extreme pornography offences

The offences

There are several offences which can be charged.

Possessing extreme pornography

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s 63.

The maximum sentence is 3 years or 2 years where the image in question is not an image which portrays a) an act which threatens a person’s life, or b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals.

Indecent images of children

There are several offences involving indecent images of children including:

1)     Criminal Justice Act 1988 s 160 (possession of indecent photographs) – max sentence 5 years

2)     Protection of Children Act 1978 s 1 (taking, distributing, publishing etc. indecent photographs) – max sentence 10 years

3)     Coroners and Justice Act 2009 s 62 (possession of prohibited images of children) – max sentence 3 years

Assessing the material

The material is assessed on a scale of 1-5 as to the severity of the images. This helps the judge decide how serious the offence is and what sentence should be imposed.

The scale runs from 1 to 5 and was established in R v Oliver 2002 EWCA Crim 127.

(1) images depicting erotic posing with no sexual activity;

(2) sexual activity between children, or solo masturbation by a child;

(3) non-penetrative sexual activity between adults and children;

(4) penetrative sexual activity between children and adults;

(5) sadism or bestiality.

Other principles / points of note

Pseudo-images are generally considered to be less serious as real photographs, but they can be just as serious.

92 images at level 4 and 5 is to be considered a large amount (R v Wakeling 2010 EWCA Crim 2210)

Reference should of course be made to the guideline.