Sentence for Nottingham killer to be reviewed

Attorney General asks court of appeal to decide if Valdo Calocane’s term was ‘unduly lenient’

THE Attorney General has referred the sentence of Nottingham triple killer Valdo Calocane to the court of appeal for it to be reviewed as “unduly lenient.”

Victoria Prentis has asked the appeal judges to decide whether the sentence should be increased so that Calocane would face prison if he was released from his secure mental hospital.

Calocane, a paranoid schizophrenic, was handed an indefinite order to be detained in a high-security hospital after he pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the basis of diminished responsibility. The 32 year-old took the lives of university students Barnaby Webber and Grace O’malley-kumar, both 19, before killing school caretaker Ian Coates, 65, in Nottingham on Jun 13 last year.

Calocane was originally charged with murder but this was downgraded to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility owing to his schizophrenia. Outside Nottingham Crown Court after the sentencing, Barnaby’s mother, Emma, criticised the CPS, saying her family had felt “rushed, hastened and railroaded” into accepting the manslaughter plea.

It is understood Ms Prentis and her legal team, who reviewed the case, believed that there should have been a “penal” element to the sentence.

Under the current order issued by the judge at his trial, Calocane could be released if he recovered his mental health provided the Justice Secretary and doctors believed he was no longer a risk to the public. The judge stepped back from issuing an order that would have required him to automatically go to jail if he was to be released.

It is understood that this would be the key way in which the sentence could be toughened up in order to no longer be regarded as potentially “unduly lenient”.

It is understood Ms Prentis believed insufficient weight was placed in the sentencing on his culpability in the crime in that he had “diminished” responsibility rather than no responsibility at all. She is also understood to have argued that not enough weight was given to the aggravating factors behind the killings including the degree of planning, the use of weapons notably knives and the risk of wider harm to the general public.

The case is currently the subject of multiple reviews including investigations into the Crown Prosecution Service’s (CPS) decision to drop the charge from murder to manslaughter and the way this was communicated to the family. After the sentencing, the families of the victims and the survivors of the attack criticised the CPS, the NHS and Nottinghamshire Police.

Mrs Webber accused the CPS of not consulting with families over the charges, saying: “We as a devastated family have been let down by multiple agency failings and ineffectiveness. The CPS did not consult us as has been reported – instead we have been rushed, hastened and railroaded.”

She said the first meeting with them was in November: “We were presented with a fait accompli that the decision had been made to accept manslaughter charges. At no point during the previous five-and-a-half months were we given any indication that this could conclude in anything other than murder.

“We do not dispute the murderer is mentally unwell and has been for a number of years. However the pre-mediated planning, the collection of lethal weapons, hiding in the shadows and brutality of the attacks are that of an individual who knew exactly what he was doing. He knew entirely that it was wrong but he did it anyway.”

In a joint statement, the families of Barnaby, Grace and Ian said: “We were very glad to hear that the Attorney General has agreed with us that the sentencing given to Valdo Calocane, who so viciously and calculatedly killed our loved ones was wrong.

“We are optimistic that when this reaches the Royal Courts of Justice for its appeal there will be an outcome that provides some of the appropriate justice that we have been calling for.”