Very considerable delay between offending and sentence, where unexplained and not attributable to the accused, constitutes a strong mitigatory circumstance that a sentencing judge must bring to account. Automatic loss of occupation resulting from conviction for criminal conduct committed in the course of the relevant employment is not necessarily a mitigating circumstance, though it may be given very modest weight where the additional punishment would be disproportionate to the offending. There is a stronger argument for mitigation where the offending is remote from the employment from which the offender is disqualified.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 30 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 30 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.