Wayne Couzens LOSES bid to reduce his whole-life sentence

Wayne Couzens LOSES bid to reduce his whole-life sentence for the murder of Sarah Everard

• Policeman used Covid powers to fake arrest of 33-year-old marketing executive 
• His lawyers argued he deserved ‘decades in jail’ but whole life order ‘excessive’ 
• Judge said ‘extreme nature’ of his crime meant the whole life order was justified 

Wayne Couzens is still set to die in prison after today losing his bid to reduce his sentence at the Court of Appeal.

In May, senior judges heard challenges or appeals to the prison sentences of five convicted killers, including the whole-life terms of former police officer Couzens and double murderer Ian Stewart.

Emma Tustin and Thomas Hughes, who killed six-year-old Arthur Labinjo-Hughes, also had their sentences reviewed, along with triple murderer Jordan Monaghan.

Today, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett and four other judges refused to lower Couzens’ sentence.

Last year, the former officer was handed a whole life term for the rape and murder of 33-year-old Sarah Everard, the first time the sentence had been imposed for a single murder of an adult not committed in the course of a terror attack. 

The depraved killer used Covid powers to conduct a fake arrest of the marketing executive as she walked home from a friend’s house in March 2021 before raping and murdering her.

The 48-year-old, who used his warrant card and handcuffs to carry out the crime, had been planning for at least a month before abducting Ms Everard as she walked home from a friend’s house in Clapham, south London. 

Scroll down for video.  

Wayne Couzens has lost his appeal against his whole-life sentence for kidnapping, raping and murdering Sarah Everard 

The 48-year-old, who used his warrant card and handcuffs to carry out the crime, had been planning for at least a month before abducting Ms Everard (pictured)  

Appealing against the whole-life term, Couzens’ lawyers argued he deserved ‘decades in jail’ but said a whole-life term was excessive.

However, in a summary read out in court, Lord Burnett said that the sentencing judge was entitled to impose a whole life order due to the facts of Couzens’ case.

Lord Burnett said that while the sentencing starting point in Couzens’ case would be a minimum term of 30 years, he continued: ‘Having regard to its aggravating features we are in no doubt that its seriousness is so exceptionally high such that a whole life order rather than a minimum term order should be made.

‘We consider this to be the correct route to a just result in this case.

‘It provides for its unique and defining feature, which was that Couzens had used his knowledge and status as a police office to perpetrate his appalling crimes against Ms (Sarah) Everard and for the extensive and extreme nature of the other aggravating features which were present: the significant and cold-blooded planning and pre-meditation; the abduction of Ms Everard; the most serious sexual conduct; the mental and physical suffering inflicted on Ms Everard before her death; and the concealment and attempts to destroy Ms Everard’s body.

‘We agree with the judge that having determined there should be a whole life order, given the misuse of Couzens’ role as a police officer and the serious aggravating features of the offending the guilty pleas did not affect the outcome.’ 

Reviewing the sentences of Arthur’s killers, the Court of Appeal was previously told the child suffered an unsurvivable brain injury while in the sole care of Tustin, who was jailed for life with a minimum term of 29 years.

Tustin and Arthur’s father, Hughes, who was sentenced to 21 years for manslaughter, appealed against the length of their sentences which were also challenged as being unduly lenient.

Today, the Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett and four other judges refused to lower Couzens’ sentence 

The judges refused to change Tustin’s sentence, finding she should not be given a whole life order and that her current sentence was not unduly lenient.

However, Hughes’ sentence was found to be unduly lenient and was increased to 24 years.

Double killer Stewart, who murdered his first wife six years before he went on to murder his fiancee, successfully appealed against his whole-life order.

Stewart killed 51-year-old children’s author Helen Bailey in 2016 and was found guilty of her murder in 2017.

After this conviction, police investigated the 2010 death of Stewart’s wife, Diane Stewart, 47, and in February he was found guilty of her murder.

Amjad Malik QC, for Stewart, argued that the whole-life order he was given for the murder of his first wife was not justified in the circumstances of the case.

In a ruling on Friday, Lord Burnett and the four other judges said Stewart was ‘not one of the rare cases’ where a whole life order should be imposed, reducing his sentence to life with a 35-year minimum term.

Judges also reviewed the sentence of Jordan Monaghan, who was handed a minimum term of 40 years at Preston Crown Court after he murdered two of his children and his new partner.

The Court of Appeal previously heard that between January 2013 and October 2016 he murdered three-week-old Ruby and 21-month-old Logan before murdering Evie Adams.

In Friday’s ruling, the judges found that while a whole life order should not be imposed, the sentence should be increased to life with a minimum term of 48 years.

Source: Read Full Article