Where a sentencing judge identifies the role of an undercover operative as a relevant sentencing factor but then finds the objective seriousness to be 'of a very high order', this may of itself demonstrate that the judge gave no real weight to the UCO's role, warranting appellate intervention. The role of the UCO does not diminish the need for a sentence reflecting strong general deterrence. The Taouk/Kada principles require meaningful application even where the offender embraced the opportunity and demonstrated capacity to commit the offence; the principles are not negated merely because the offender was willing and able to offend.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.