GB - Sefaah, R. v

J U D G M E N T

LADY JUSTICE SHARP: On 24 August 2012 in the Crown Court at Kingston upon Thames, the appellant, Kevin Sefaah, was convicted of Conspiracy to Rob (count 1) and two counts of Possessing an Imitation Firearm with Intent to Commit an Indictable Offence (counts 2 and 3). On 2 October 2012 he was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment on count 1 and 8 years' imprisonment on counts 2 and 3. All sentences were made concurrent.

Four co-accused, Christabelle Amoah, Wayne Sefaah, Daisy Owusu Henewah and Lee Palmer, were convicted on all three counts. A fifth man, Jeffrey Amoah, did not attend the trial and is currently at large. The appellant appeals against conviction by limited leave of the full court.

Two issues are raised on this appeal: first, whether the judge should have ruled that there was no case to answer on counts 2 and 3, and secondly whether she gave the jury adequate directions on those counts in her summing-up. The full court rejected the appellant's renewed applications to like effect in relation to count 1.

Christabelle Amoah, Daisy Henewah, Wayne Sefaah and the appellant (who is Wayne Sefaah's younger brother) are cousins. Jeffrey Amoah, although he has the same surname as Christabelle, is no relation to her. Lee Palmer was a friend of Wayne Sefaah.

The case concerns an armed robbery of the Halifax Bank in Mitcham which took place shortly after 5 pm on Friday, 16 July 2010. Two armed men, one white and one black, dressed as workmen, forced their way in through a rear door whilst staff were putting out rubbish. The staff and two customers, an elderly couple, were threatened with firearms and forced to lie on the ground. The branch manager, Rachel Hall, was assaulted, forced to open the door to the counter and the safe area and to enter her access code to the safe.

The door to the counter area had been propped open with a chair against regulations, but an employee had managed to close it and activated the panic alarm at 5.14 pm. Two men made off through the rear of the bank and into an awaiting getaway van with £100,000. The van was then driven off. It was abandoned a short distance away with £5,000 of the stolen money still in it. The prosecution allege that another vehicle must then have been used to transport the robbers and the money away. There was an extensive investigation after the robbery, and ten months later the defendants were all arrested.

The prosecution case at trial was as follows. This was a carefully planned rob

J U D G M E N T

The prosecution case at trial was as follows. This was a carefully planned rob

Sefaah, R. v

Areas of Law