On sentence, the court a quo considered the mitigating factors and weighed them against the aggravating features.Amongst the mitigating factors it took into account were the lengthy pre-trial incarceration of the appellant, the torture the appellant was subjected to by the State agents prior to being prosecuted; his contributions to ...
On sentence, the court a quo considered the mitigating factors and weighed them against the aggravating features.
Amongst the mitigating factors it took into account were the lengthy pre-trial incarceration of the appellant, the torture the appellant was subjected to by the State agents prior to being prosecuted; his contributions to the local community and that he was a first offender. The aggravating features the Court took into account included the seriousness of the offence, particularly that he knew, as a professional arms dealer and former member of the special constabulary, that these were dangerous weapons the use of which could seriously affect national security.
The court a quo exercised its discretion and imposed the sentence of 4 years imprisonment of which 1 year was suspended on the usual conditions.
We do not share the view that the court a quo did not place sufficient weight on the mitigatory factors which it clearly took into account. The sentence imposed reflects that the court considered the mitigatory factors to be weighty because the maximum sentence for the offence is 10 years.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
