Court report: 24/08/2021 at Snaresbrook Crown Court
I’m in courtroom 4 before His Honour Judge Zeidman QC sitting with two magistrates, Ms C Crampin JP and Ms G Pierre JP.
This was an appeal against a 24-month-sentence following the conviction of Mr Ocean Rowe, 18, of Borough at Highbury Magistrates Court in December 2020. The original conviction was covered by Southwark News at the time.
He had been convicted of two offences:
Count 1: Attempted grievous bodily harm
Count 2: Possession of an offensive weapon in a public place
The court was played CCTV of the incident which took place on August 8th 2020. The appellant Mr Rowe can be seen ‘socialising’ in a side street adjacent to Oxford Street with two friends – one of whom we’re told is 17-year-old Jeremy Chalarca-Meneses.
The CCTV shows the group walking onto Oxford Street and we are shown the point at which Mr Rowe says he recognises Mr AB, who it’s claimed had been involved in posting videos on social media mocking Mr Rowe following a previous violent incident.
Mr Rowe is seen pulling out a machete from his backpack and he begins chasing after Mr AB with Mr Meneses following immediately behind. It’s 5.30pm and Oxford Street is packed with members of public.
We can see the group running down an alleyway to a road adjacent to Kent House on Market Place. Footage shows Mr Rowe swinging his machete at Mr AB twice, missing both times. “Thank god the defendant didn’t kill him” the judge remarks. Unfortunately, Mr AB also produces a knife and stabs Mr Meneses who tragically dies at the scene a short time later.
Upon seeing his friend seriously injured on the floor we’re told that Mr Rowe left the scene without calling an ambulance or attempting to summon help.
The court was told that Mr AB had been questioned in connection with the stabbing, however, the CPS accepted it was an act of self-defence. It’s understood there may still be active proceedings in relation to the carrying of a bladed article and as a result Mr AB isn’t being named by this website.
Mr Rowe was arrested on August 12th 2020 and responded ‘no comment’ to all questions at interview. At his trial at the lower court we’re told he pleaded self-defence however it’s understood this was rejected by the District Judge.
The court is told that an appeal against his actual conviction was abandoned leaving just this appeal against sentence.
Lawyer Ms Mel Stooks, representing the appellant, explained to the court that the current arrangements for supervising Mr Rowe were “not in any way tailored to the vulnerability that needs addressing”. She told the court that her client had already spent 12 months in prison, enough to count as a punishment, and if so minded could substitute his sentence with what she described as “an extremely rigorous community order”. Ms Stooks relied upon three expert reports which had been prepared for the court.
In response to the suggestion that a “rigorous community order” would suffice, HHJ Zeidman QC considered a 12-month-program that Mr Rowe had completed following a similar conviction back in 2019, yet he had still gone on to commit these offences. “Doesn’t that indicate that one needs to try something different… Demonstrate to the defendant that violence of this kind results in a harsh penalty”.
In delivering the court’s decision HHJ Zeidman QC first explained he was sorry that they hadn’t been able to do so prior to lunch. “Administrative inconvenience pales into complete insignificance to ensure we had sufficient time to consider the merits of this appeal” he said.
“Arising out of this violent incident one person lost their life and others so easily could have been killed” … “worth reflecting on what a horror that would be”.
This would have been a “horrifying incident to members of the public who could see what was happening” and it was “good fortune not design” that his machete has missed Mr AB.
It was “really impossible to see how a non-custodial-sentence could be appropriate in this case” and the court had “reached the conclusion that the community orders thus far hadn’t worked”.
Accepting that the appellant had ‘High Culpability’ in the context of the sentencing guidelines the judge said Mr Rowe “was someone who went out with a weapon… a highly dangerous weapon” who had played a “leading role” in a “persistent chase”. “If this defendant had not done this … his friend would be still be alive”.
Having placed the offences into Category 3, the guidelines recommend a custodial sentence with a starting point of 5 years, with a range of between 4 and 7. It’s understood this would be subject to significant reductions because the appellant was age 17 at the time of the offence and credit for time served on remand.
Despite the “very helpful and realistic submissions” of Ms Stooks the court was “unable to allow this appeal”. The crime was “so serious he undoubtedly deserves the sentence upon him” the Judge concluded before ending the hearing with some words of encouragement to Mr Rowe to keep out of trouble:
“When he comes out of custody, he starts life afresh. In future years they will respect you and say ‘he had a bad start but look at him now’”
Mouse in the Court 