WILLIAM SCOTT ELLIS v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE

[1] The appellant is William Scott Ellis who pled guilty in the High Court at Glasgow on an indictment containing a number of charges in an amended form. In effect, in respect of the two common law charges, the sentencing judge imposed a cumulo sentence of nine years' imprisonment and on the other charges he imposed concurrent sentences. The appellant has appealed against the sentence of nine years' imprisonment in respect of the two common law charges.

[2] The first of these, which is charge 4 on the indictment as amended, was a charge of breaking into his wife's house, assaulting her, presenting a handgun at her, compelling her to consume a quantity of drugs and thereafter abducting her, carrying her to a motor vehicle and then between 3 and 7 June 1999, at various places confining her in the car against her will, repeatedly applying handcuffs to her arms and legs, repeatedly presenting the handgun at her and placing her in such a state of fear and alarm for her safety that she jumped from the car when it was in motion, all to her injury.

[3] The second charge to which he pled guilty, which is number 5 on the indictment, was a charge of assaulting the daughter of the first complainer and of compelling her to consume a quantity of tablets, all to her injury and to the danger of her life.

[4] The circumstances of the two offences are not in dispute. They are set out in full in the report of the sentencing judge and we do not need to rehearse them.

[8] In our view, even giving full weight to the personal, and indeed, sad circumstances of the appellant, it is quite impossible to say that the sentence of nine years was excessive. Indeed, had it not been for those circumstances, we consider that a more severe sentence would have been merited. We are therefore unable to regard the sentence which was imposed as being excessive and the appeal against sentence is accordingly refused.