{"id":653417,"date":"2026-04-23T01:02:14","date_gmt":"2026-04-22T23:02:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/"},"modified":"2026-04-23T01:02:14","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T23:02:14","slug":"r-v-talliq-mwalim","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/","title":{"rendered":"R v Talliq Mwalim"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

LADY JUSTICE WHIPPLE: Introduction 1 On 7\u00a0December\u00a02020, the\u00a0appellant pleaded guilty to Count\u00a02, which was causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and Count\u00a03, which was having an\u00a0offensive weapon. He maintained his plea of not guilty to the\u00a0first count on the indictment, which was one of attempted murder, of which he was convicted on 20\u00a0December\u00a02021 following a\u00a0trial at Basildon Crown Court before HHJ\u00a0Graham. 2 He was sentenced on 28\u00a0March\u00a02022 by the\u00a0same judge. That judge of course had had the\u00a0advantage of having presided over the\u00a0appellant's trial and knew well the\u00a0facts and circumstances that he was dealing with. The\u00a0sentence imposed was one of 23\u00a0years' imprisonment for the attempted murder with six\u00a0months' imprisonment concurrent for having an offensive weapon. The\u00a0grievous bodily harm with intent, which was charged as Count\u00a02, was an\u00a0alternative to the attempted murder count. The\u00a0offence had been committed during the\u00a0currency of an\u00a018-month Community Order for an\u00a0offence of affray and two offences of failing to surrender and that Community Order was revoked. The appellant now appeals to this court against his sentence with the leave of the single judge. 3 The\u00a0co-accused was Jay\u00a0Hursham and he was convicted of Counts 1, attempted murder, and 3, having an\u00a0offensive weapon. He was sentenced to 24\u00a0years' imprisonment. The\u00a0other co-accused was Bradley\u00a0Dulieu, who was convicted of Count\u00a02 of grievous bodily harm with intent and pleaded guilty to Counts\u00a04 of dangerous driving and 5\u00a0driving whilst disqualified. He was sentenced to 10\u00a0years' imprisonment. Facts 4 The\u00a0facts in brief are these. At around 20 past midnight on 1\u00a0July\u00a02020, Darnell\u00a0Walker dropped his girlfriend back at her home in South Ockendon before driving home. Walker noticed a\u00a0BMW was following his car. The appellant, Jay\u00a0Hursham and Bradley\u00a0Dulieu were inside that BMW. They were wearing balaclavas or face coverings. Mr Walker drove around Ockendon in an unsuccessful attempt to lose them. 5 At 40\u00a0minutes past midnight, Mr Walker drove to the front of his house with the intention of running inside. He was followed by the\u00a0appellant and Hursham who exited the\u00a0BMW and attacked him with machetes. Mr Walker ran to the\u00a0gardens behind his house. He was struck multiple times. Neighbours came to Mr Walker's aid. He was severely injured. There was a\u00a0gaping wound at the back of his neck and he was bleeding heavily. Police and an\u00a0ambulance crew attended shortly after. He was taken to the\u00a0Royal London Hospital. 6 The\u00a0BMW was captured on Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras at ten minutes past one in the morning, driving towards Shenfield on the A1023. A\u00a0police chase followed involving armed officers and a\u00a0police helicopter. Two police vehicles eventually enacted a\u00a0forced stop of the BMW by ramming it. Dulieu was in the\u00a0driver's seat. He was wearing a\u00a0mask. The appellant fled from the rear passenger door, but was detained nearby. Hursham also ran away, but was found hiding in a\u00a0hot tub. 7 Mr Walker needed blood transfusions that amounted to 40 per\u00a0cent of the blood in his body. He underwent surgery on his neck, left arm and face. He sustained 13 injuries, caused by slash and incision wounds, some were categorised as chop wounds. The\u00a0two most serious injuries were to the\u00a0back of his neck and to his left arm. 8 The\u00a0appellant gave no comment in his police interview. The\u00a0appellant had one previous conviction from 2019 for which he had been given a\u00a0Community Order. He had no prior experience in custody. Hursham had 50 convictions for 32 offences between 2012 and 2020. His relevant convictions included offences of robbery committed in 2012, violent disorder committed in 2014, threatening a\u00a0witness or a\u00a0juror with intent to interfere with justice in 2014 and battery twice in 2014. Sentence 9 The\u00a0judge rehearsed the\u00a0facts of this offending. He noted that the appellant was 22 now and 20 at the time of these offences. His only previous offence was committed at the age of 19. The\u00a0judge said that the attempted murder fell into Category B of the\u00a0Guideline, which is for\u00a0cases of high culpability. There was dispute before him as to whether there was Category 1 or 2 harm. The\u00a0judge noted that there was no up-to-date evidence from the\u00a0victim. The judge then imposed the\u00a0sentences we have described on these defendants. Grounds of Appeal 10 By his grounds of appeal, Mr\u00a0Fidler, who represented the\u00a0appellant at trial, contends that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive for the following reasons. First, the\u00a0judge failed to give sufficient weight and allowance for the appellant's age. Secondly, there was a\u00a0disparity in the\u00a0sentence of the appellant and that imposed on Hursham. The\u00a0sentence for Hursham was only one year longer than the appellant's sentence, despite Hursham's greater criminal record, the\u00a0fact that he was older and, unlike the\u00a0appellant, that he had not expressed any remorse. 11 Mr\u00a0Fidler filed a\u00a0skeleton argument dated 27\u00a0October\u00a02022 in support of his appeal today. He has also relied on a\u00a0number of authorities, which we have read, which are addressed to the\u00a0issue of dealing with young adult offenders. 12 In his submissions today, for which we thank him, Mr\u00a0Fidler has emphasised the\u00a0points raised in his grounds of appeal and skeleton argument and he has also questioned the\u00a0lack of pre-sentence report before the\u00a0Crown Court. Decision 13 It appears that the judge put this offending in Category B2. That gave the\u00a0appellant the benefit of the doubt when it came to the\u00a0extent of harm, bearing in mind the\u00a0lack of up-to-date evidence from the\u00a0victim. Putting aside the categorisation question for the moment, these were on any view appalling injuries. The\u00a0photographs are extremely graphic. The\u00a0injuries were deep and brutal. The\u00a0victim could well have died. We have read the Victim Impact Statements which bear witness to the\u00a0trauma of this attack. 14 We turn first to deal with Mr\u00a0Fidler's suggestion that this was an\u00a0appropriate case for the\u00a0judge to obtain a\u00a0pre-sentence report. It does not seem that such a\u00a0report was requested before sentence at trial. Although in many cases it may be advisable to obtain a\u00a0pre-sentence report, particularly so where the defendant is under 21, this was a\u00a0case where the\u00a0judge had presided over the\u00a0trial which had lasted some time and the judge would have formed a\u00a0very good view of the defendant during the\u00a0course of the trial. The\u00a0defendant at the time of these offences was 20 and a\u00a0half. He was a\u00a0little older at the time of trial. We do not consider that in the\u00a0circumstances of this case it was necessary for the judge to obtain a\u00a0pre-sentence report and it was permissible for the judge to progress to sentence without one. 15 We turn then to the\u00a0sentence that was imposed. Category B2 gives a\u00a0start point of 25\u00a0years and a\u00a0range of 20 to 30\u00a0years. The\u00a0sentence for the attempted murder was intended to reflect the\u00a0totality of the offending. There was, in addition to the\u00a0attempted murder conviction, the\u00a0plea to possession of an\u00a0offensive weapon. That was of course the\u00a0weapon used in the\u00a0attack on Mr Walker and its possession may be seen as part and parcel of the attempted murder. The\u00a0breach of the Community Order was different and would have added an additional element to the\u00a0overall offending. 16 The appellant's only real mitigation was his age. He was born on 31\u00a0January\u00a02000 and he was, as we have said, 20 and a\u00a0half when he committed these offences. By the\u00a0time of sentence on 28\u00a0March\u00a02022, he was 22\u00a0years old. He was young, but this is not a\u00a0case where the appellant had just turned 18 after the index offending. Further, there is no suggestion that he was not of normal developmental maturity for his age. For that reason, we are not persuaded that the case law that we were shown has particular relevance. He was not of good character given his recent conviction for violence leading to the Community Order, a sentence which he breached by these index offences. 17 The\u00a0judge accepted that the appellant had himself accepted some responsibility for his part in this attack by his plea to Count 2 and, to that extent, he had shown awareness and remorse. The\u00a0appellant had also written a\u00a0letter to the\u00a0judge saying that this had been a\u00a0lesson to him and that he had reformed his ways, but he did not admit the\u00a0charge of attempted murder and so the remorse shown was not absolute. 18 We have concluded that the\u00a0sentence of 23\u00a0years amply reflects the available mitigation for the appellant, including his young age at the time of the\u00a0commission of these offences. 19 Mr\u00a0Fidler also complains of disparity by comparing the\u00a0appellant's sentence with the\u00a0sentence of 24\u00a0years' imposed on Hursham. Hursham was born on 16\u00a0April\u00a01997. He was 23\u00a0years and four\u00a0months when the\u00a0offence was committed and he was about to turn 25 at sentence. He was older than the\u00a0applicant and he had many more convictions and he had failed to show the same degree of remorse as had the\u00a0appellant. Hursham was given a\u00a0higher sentence than the\u00a0appellant by a\u00a0margin of one year. The\u00a0judge was plainly alive to the\u00a0differences between them. It may be arguable that Hursham could have received a\u00a0longer sentence than he did, but that is not the\u00a0issue before us. 20 We are satisfied that the\u00a0sentence that was imposed on the appellant was just and proportionate and we dismiss this appeal. __________<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n

Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

LADY JUSTICE WHIPPLE: Introduction 1 On 7 December 2020, the appellant pleaded guilty to Count 2, which was causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and Count 3, which was having an offensive weapon. He maintained his plea of not guilty to the first count on the indictment, which was one of attempted murder, of which he was convicted on 20…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7608],"kji_court":[8238],"kji_chamber":[],"kji_year":[32183],"kji_subject":[7638],"kji_keyword":[7633,32899,32898,7621,8348],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-653417","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-royaume-uni","kji_court-court-of-appeal-criminal-division","kji_year-32183","kji_subject-famille","kji_keyword-appellant","kji_keyword-attempted","kji_keyword-hursham","kji_keyword-judge","kji_keyword-sentence","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"\nR v Talliq Mwalim - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R v Talliq Mwalim\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"LADY JUSTICE WHIPPLE: Introduction 1 On 7 December 2020, the appellant pleaded guilty to Count 2, which was causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and Count 3, which was having an offensive weapon. He maintained his plea of not guilty to the first count on the indictment, which was one of attempted murder, of which he was convicted on 20...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"8 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\\\/\",\"name\":\"R v Talliq Mwalim - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-22T23:02:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"R v Talliq Mwalim\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"R v Talliq Mwalim - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"R v Talliq Mwalim","og_description":"LADY JUSTICE WHIPPLE: Introduction 1 On 7 December 2020, the appellant pleaded guilty to Count 2, which was causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and Count 3, which was having an offensive weapon. He maintained his plea of not guilty to the first count on the indictment, which was one of attempted murder, of which he was convicted on 20...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"8 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/","name":"R v Talliq Mwalim - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-22T23:02:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/r-v-talliq-mwalim\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"R v Talliq Mwalim"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/653417","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=653417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=653417"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=653417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}