Child sentencing is ‘crying out’ for laws
Court hears options for boy, 14, convicted of murder
THERE is no statutory basis for sentence reviews in cases of children found guilty of serious crimes and the area is ‘crying out for legislation’, the Central Criminal Court has heard.
Judge Tony Hunt yesterday heard submissions in the case of the boy who was 14 when he murdered Mongolian woman Urantsetseg Tserendorj two years ago.
The judge adjourned the sentencing hearing to next month to allow him time to consider the options open to him.
The teenager, who is now 17, had pleaded not guilty to the murder of Ms Tserendorj but guilty to her manslaughter on January 29, 2021.
The State did not accept his plea, and the boy twice stood trial for her murder.
The original jury was unable to reach a verdict. However, in November last year, a reduced panel jury at his retrial found him guilty of murder by a majority of 10 to one, after eight hours and 59 minutes of deliberations.
The teen had pleaded guilty to producing a knife and to attempting to rob Ms Tserendorj on a walkway between George’s Dock and Custom House Quay in the IFSC, Dublin, on January 20, 2021.
At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, Judge Hunt heard submissions in relation to the options available to him when sentencing the youth.
Because he was just 14 when he killed Ms Tserendorj, the usual mandatory sentence of life imprisonment does not apply.
Prosecution counsel Seán Guerin said he wanted to take the court through what it needed to be aware of in terms of sentencing.
He said previously, in his address to the court, defence counsel Michael O’Higgins had referred to the different options available; either a life sentence or a determinant sentence, and at that stage the issue of a review date arose. Mr Guerin said the law clearly allows for the sentence of life but that was not required in this case.
He said there has been uncertainty for some time over the power for a review of sentence in the case of a young person.
Mr Guerin said the Court of Appeal has said there is merit in reviews but that there is no statutory basis for this.
He highlighted several cases in which the Court of Appeal had determined that a review of sentence was appropriate.
Responding to Mr Guerin’s submission, Mr O’Higgins said: ‘It seems to be completely without controversy that this is a matter crying out for legislation.’
Mr O’Higgins said in relation to the three options available – a life sentence, a life sentence with review or a determinative sentence – his client’s preference would be a determinative sentence so that he ‘has something to work towards’.
He said: ‘One might say it avoids the situation to which these difficulties give rise. Unfortunately, the Court of Appeal has said you can’t suspend a period of detention imposed on a minor.’
He said that as far as the question of whether a review was to be put in place, there would be an automatic exit or a possibility to suspend some of that sentence, ‘it would be very, very difficult to say’.
‘Again, this would be an argument to put in place a determinative sentence,’ Mr O’Higgins added.
He said it had an element of ‘clean determination’ without unnecessary uncertainty hanging over it.
After hearing both sides’ submissions, Judge Hunt adjourned the hearing until February 13.
During the teenager’s trial, the court heard that Ms Tserendorj, a Mongolian national who had been living in Dublin with her family for around 15 years, was returning home from work at around 9pm on January 20 when she was confronted by the accused asking for money.
When she told him she did not have any money, the teenager stabbed her in the neck. She died of her injuries nine days later in hospital, on January 29, 2021.
The teen admitted stabbing the 49-year-old when gardaí called to his home on January 21.
Mr Guerin had contended that the attack was a ‘callous, unprovoked and vicious act of thuggery’ intended to cause injury.
Mr O’Higgins told the court the murder was not premeditated and the crime was opportunistic.
‘This is crying out for legislation’