Derek Gale [2019] EWCA Crim 1051

The appellant was convicted of arson, being reckless as to whether life was endangered, after trial and sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment.
He had been in a relationship with his partner for 8 years, and they lived together with their 3 children. On the day in question, the appellant looked after the youngest child while his partner went out with the other two children. The appellant had drunk to excess and argued with his partner on her return.

The appellant said he would leave but then refused to do so. He set fire to the curtains and sat on the sofa, saying, “you’re not going to get out of here alive”. His partner took the two eldest children out of the house, returning with a neighbour to the smoke-filled house to rescue the baby who was upstairs. The appellant remained in the front room; the curtains and aerial box were on fire. He pulled the curtains out of the house and neighbours were able to put out the fire inside which had spread towards the ceiling.

On appeal the aggravating factors were not challenged but the defence sought to emphasise the mitigating factors more fully. The fire was short lived and put out by neighbours, it was unsophisticated and unplanned. There was only one point of ignition, no accelerant was used, and it was done in full view of his partner, enabling her to get out quickly.  Although the personal mitigation was limited it was noted he had lost his children, who had been taken into care, as a result of the offence.

Held: no two cases are the same and the court was not assisted by an over-elaborate and detailed analysis of facts underlying previous decisions. The sentencing judge was entitled to regard this as a serious example of its kind. In particular, the recklessness here was directed at a baby asleep upstairs, rescued more by good fortune than anything else. Moreover, a striking feature of the case was the total failure of the appellant to assist his endangered family.

The appeal was dismissed.