The Attorney General has been asked to intervene in a case of an arsonist who received a 'lenient' sentence, after a vigorous campaign by his victim and her family.
The Crown Prosecution Service in Bradford has backed mum Rachel Harrison, whose former partner torched her home while she and their son slept.
David Murphy was sentenced to two years' probation by Judge Gerald Coles QC at Bradford Crown Court, after admitting arson reckless as to whether life was endangered.
He had started two separate fires in Miss Harrison's council flat in Queensbury in the early hours of the morning. She and their son Jordan, who was four at the time, were lucky to escape without injury.
The offence of arson can carry a life sentence, where lives are put at risk, but Murphy was given probation after the court heard evidence that he had suffered from mental illness and had already served a year on remand.
The decision caused an outcry: a devastated Miss Harrison wrote a four-page letter to the CPS asking them to consider an appeal, friends signed a petition, and Bradford South MP Gerry Sutcliffe added his voice to the campaign.
Today, Richard Hodgson, branch Crown prosecutor for Bradford, said: "The CPS has taken the view that this sentence was unduly lenient, and will be making a submission to the Attorney General asking him to refer it to the Court of Appeal, but it is at his discretion.
"This is very rare. There are only one or two cases a year from Bradford.
"This offence is punishable with life imprisonment, and a probation order was made - there's a great disparity between the actual sentence and the potential sentence. Lives were at risk."
Miss Harrison, who has now moved away from Queensbury and lives in fear of further comebacks from her attacker, said: "I am hopeful that it has got this far, but I won't be happy until I hear what the Attorney General is going to do about it - I have been let down by the legal system in the past."
A decision on whether the case will be referred to the Court of Appeal is expected next week.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article