MC, MB, JP & JC [2019] EWCA Crim 1026

The Solicitor General sought to challenge the sentences of MC & MB as unduly lenient whilst they, in turn, sought to appeal the sentences as being manifestly excessive, as did the remaining two co-accused. All four have outstanding appeals against conviction.

The offenders were convicted of various offences relating to human trafficking into the UK, within the UK, labour exploitation and money laundering. In sentencing the judge imposed concurrent sentences on all counts making it clear that she “loaded” the lead counts so as to reflect the totality of the offending.

MC was convicted in 6 of 7 counts and received 11 years imprisonment, MB was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 9 years. JC was convicted on the 3 counts on which she faced trial and received 7 years, JP was similarly convicted and received 8 years. In addition Slavery and Trafficking Prevention Orders were imposed.

The offenders were part of a family run organised gang involved in the large-scale sophisticated and extensive trafficking of Polish nationals to and within the UK for the purposes of exploitation. There were up to 200 potentially trafficked individuals, 66 gave evidence at trial, the operation running over a five year period. The financial identity of the victims were stolen and a large proportion of their wages taken. Control was kept by the vulnerability of the victims and also by fear and violence. It was said that the value of the financial exploitation was in the region of £380,000 although the criminal property generated by the conspiracy involved some £2 million.

The operation centred around the B family and the head of the operation was AB who was in Poland awaiting extradition at the time of the hearing. MC was found to be in a very senior management role, AB’s righthand man, and directly controlled one of the houses where living conditions were particularly squalid, he continued to participate in the conspiracy, at a “strategic level” when on police bail.

MB was AB’s uncle and as a senior family member had an influential and high-level significant role. He recruited victims and ran an “unsavoury” property.

JC was 19 when introduced to the conspiracy by MC and involved for a relatively short time of 10 months. She was found to be an enthusiastic participant motivated by financial gain, although she was not personally cruel or hostile to the victims, she was contemptuous toward them.

JP was the matriarch, mother of AB, playing a significant role in the operation although strategic decisions were left to the men.

There is no sentencing guideline as yet, but it is usual to have regard to the observations of Lord Judge LCJ in Attorney General’s Reference [2013] 2 Cr App R (S) 71 at para 10.

The sentences imposed may have been appropriate if the maximum sentence was 14 years, as it was up to July 2015, but the conspiracies charged both antedated and postdated the relevant date. For the latter period there was no limit in terms of sentence. By reference to the judge’s findings and by reference to the required approach it cannot be said that the sentences were unduly lenient.

The appeals against sentence for MC and MB were refused. The involvement of JC was limited to 10 months, a relatively short time compared to the others and she had little active involvement after July 2015. Whilst she was aware of the overall scale of the operation, she played no part in the trafficking within the UK and no part in accommodation arrangements. Her sentence was reduced to 5 years. JP’s active participation was limited even if she was the matriarch, she was much lower down in the scheme than MC and MB. The sentence of 8 years was quashed, and a total of 5 years and 6 months substituted.