Express & Star

Father who murdered daughter in play-fight will not have sentence increased

Simon Vickers, 50, was jailed for life with a minimum term of 15 years in February for the murder of his 14-year-old daughter, Scarlett Vickers.

By contributor Callum Parke, PA Law Reporter
Published
Last updated
Simon Vickers police mugshot
Simon Vickers, 50, was sentenced to life with a minimum term of 15 years for the murder of his 14-year-old daughter Scarlett (Durham Constabulary/PA)

A father who murdered his teenage daughter by stabbing her in the heart during a play-fight will not have his sentence increased, judges have ruled.

Simon Vickers was jailed for life with a minimum term of 15 years in February for the murder of his 14-year-old daughter, Scarlett Vickers, at their home in Darlington on July 5 last year.

The Solicitor General sought to refer the 50-year-old’s sentence to the Court of Appeal, with their lawyers arguing at a hearing on Thursday that it was “unduly lenient” and should be increased as it “failed to adequately reflect the overall seriousness of the offending”.

Barristers for Vickers opposed the bid, arguing the sentence should remain the same.

In a ruling, three senior judges ruled that Vickers’ sentence was not “unduly lenient” and should not be increased, stating it is “properly to be described as merciful, but it is none the worse for that”.

Lord Justice Stuart-Smith, sitting with Mr Justice Goose and Mrs Justice Eady, said: “This was a justifiable and humane resolution of a very difficult sentencing exercise.”

In written submissions, Louise Oakley, for the Solicitor General, said that Scarlett and her mother, Sarah Hall, had been “messing around throwing grapes at each other” in the kitchen of their home on July 5, which Vickers wanted them to stop.

Ms Hall then pinched Vickers with some cooking tongs and caught his finger, leading him to complain he had been hurt.

Scarlett then said “Dad, don’t be a wimp”, the court was told, before Ms Hall turned to resume cooking.

Ms Oakley said: “Exactly what then happened only the offender knows.

“What is clear is that the offender must have picked up a kitchen knife and deliberately stabbed his daughter in the chest.

“The offender continues to deny this is what happened.”

Ms Hall made a 999 call and told the operator they had been “messing about” and that her partner had thrown something at their daughter, and he “didn’t realise”.

Vickers told a paramedic that his daughter had lunged towards him during a bout of play-fighting, but then denied saying this at his trial at Teesside Crown Court.

He gave different accounts of what happened in the seconds before he stabbed a knife 11cm into Scarlett’s lung and heart, with a jury convicting him of murder by a majority of 10-2 in January.

The sentencing judge, Mr Justice Cotter, said the version of events that Vickers told the jury – that he had accidentally swiped the knife across the work surface and into his daughter’s chest without realising – was “unconvincing and wholly implausible”.

The judge accepted that the defendant was “devastated”, that he was a “broken man”, and that there was no premeditation or intention to kill.

He said: “You have lost your only child at your own hand, and you will always live with that awful fact.”

Vickers had drunk wine and smoked cannabis that night, but the judge said he was not sure that alcohol had contributed to the offence, which was a “momentary but devastating act of anger”.

Mr Justice Cotter said: “It stole one young, precious life, ruined your life, your wife’s life and Scarlett’s relatives and friends.”

Ms Oakley said in written submissions that Mr Justice Cotter was faced with “an extremely difficult sentencing task” involving “an unprecedented burst of anger by an otherwise caring parent”.

But she continued that the judge should have given Vickers a longer sentence because he used a knife against a child in their own home, and because of a previous conviction for wounding with intent from 1993.

She said: “It is submitted that the level of mitigation available to the offender in this case for his lack of premeditation and the absence of an intention to kill should not be given as much weight as some other cases, given he deliberately picked up and used a knife for no reason whatsoever.

“Scarlett posed no threat to the offender.”

Nicholas Lumley KC, for Vickers, did not make oral submissions during the hearing, but Lord Justice Stuart-Smith said that he had submitted in writing that Mr Justice Cotter “came to a conclusion that was reasonably open to him”.

Giving judgment, Lord Justice Stuart-Smith said that Vickers, Ms Hall and Scarlett were “a happy family who doted on each other” and that their lives were changed “catastrophically” by the killing.

But he continued that Vickers’ actions “were completely out of character for the man he had become”, and that there was “substantial mitigation available”.

He added that the “quasi-mathematical” approach of the Solicitor General to the sentence was “inapposite”.

Vickers, who attended the hearing via video link from HMP Gartree in Leicestershire, showed no reaction as the ruling was handed down.

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.