Robbers' appeal fails

[Geezer]

http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/content ... 3A29%3A083" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10 February 2009
TWO teenagers who were locked up for their part in the brutal robbery of a Royal Mail employee have failed in challenges to their sentences.

Nathan Sylvester, 18, of Perth Road, Plaistow, and a 17-year-old accomplice, referred to as 'N', admitted the robbery when they appeared at Snaresbrook Crown Court last September.

A third youth has since been tried and convicted for his part in the robbery, which took place outside Barking's MFI store last May, but is yet to be sentenced.

After considering appeals by Sylvester and 'N' against their 40-month sentences, Mr Justice Pitchford and Mr Justice Roderick Evans said that, even though older youths may have put pressure on them to get involved, they deserved the sentences they got.

Mr Justice Pitchford told the Appeal Court how the Royal Mail employee, Albert Donkar, was hit several times by 'N' and the third youth before his cashbox, containing £3,500, was stolen.

Sylvester, sitting in a getaway car nearby, drove all three of them away, but they were caught because Mr Donkar had noted the car's registration.

Lawyers for the youths argued that their sentences were too long. They said they had owed money to older youths and were under pressure to pay it back.

Mr Justice Pitchford said: "Having considered the evidence available to the sentencing judge, we are prepared to proceed on the basis that others more sophisticated than these appellants may well have been involved.

"Nevertheless, we note that these appellants took an active role in the execution of a serious offence of robbery.

"It was contended before the sentencing judge that the offence lacked some sophistication. That may be so, but the robbery undoubtedly involved targeting and planning.

"It must have been obvious to any participant, including the driver Nathan Sylvester, that it would require physical force or at least the threat of severe force."

The sentences imposed were not "manifestly excessive", he added, dismissing the appeals.

[andy2007]

Nice one! That's excellent news!