A gangster jailed for delivering a gun to men who were plotting to kill a rival has failed in a bid to have his prison sentence cut.
Alistair Douglas, 56, was given a five-year and three-month long jail term over his involvement in a scheme to kill Robert Ross.
The High Court in Glasgow heard how Douglas delivered a Glock pistol and bullets to Gerald Gilmour in a pub.
Gilmour, 35, used encrypted messaging app Encrochat - a platform favoured by organised criminals - to plot with accomplice Martin Mullen, 34.
A judge heard how the pair wanted to murder Robert “Bob” Ross - a man described in court as being a member of a “rival organised crime group”.
But the police became aware of the plot and detectives arrested the trio before they could commit a crime.
Douglas, of Paisley, Renfrewshire, was given a five year and three month jail term for involvement in serious organised crime which included delivering the Glock to Gilmour as well as the trafficking of drugs.
Gilmour and Mullen, also of Paisley, Renfrewshire, were given seven year terms on conspiracy to murder charges by judge Douglas Brown.
This prompted lawyers for Douglas to go to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh as they had believed their client should have received a lesser sentence.
Defence solicitor advocate Ann Ogg told appeal judges Lord Pentland and Lord Boyd of Duncansby that their colleague had made mistakes when he decided what sentence to impose on Douglas.
She said the sentence was excessive given that he had no criminal record whilst his co-accused did have previous convictions. Ms Ogg also said that her client had a lesser role in the scheme than his two accused. However, in a written judgement issued by the court on Friday, Lord Pentland rejected the arguments made to him and Lord Boyd by Ms Ogg.
He concluded that judge Brown had acted correctly in deciding what sentence to impose on Douglas.
Lord Pentland wrote: “While the principle is an important one.. the question of comparative justice as between various accused on the same indictment can only be approached on a somewhat broad basis.
“Attempting to draw fine distinctions is not appropriate or helpful. At the end of the day the focus for this court must be on the question whether the sentence imposed on the appellant was excessive in the whole circumstances.
“We are satisfied that it was not.”
The three men appeared in the High Court in Glasgow earlier this year.
The court heard how Mullen and Gilmour communicated via Encrochat – a platform favoured by criminals.
But, after the messaging service was smashed by French and Dutch law authorities in 2020, the kill bid was foiled.
Police went on to discover a Glock pistol and a shotgun – said to have been used in a previous murder – at a house linked to Gilmour.
Both Gilmour and Mullen pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to murder at the hearing.
The crime spanned between May 5 and June 2020 listing addresses in Paisley, Renfrewshire and Larkhall, Lanarkshire.
In April 2020, Mullen stated in a text to an associate how he would like him “chopped”.
Mullen later claimed Gilmour said he would “do that Bob Ross”. Gilmour was later in contact with the head of his crime gang.
The prosecutor told the court: “They discuss the job, weapons involved, payment and an Encrochat phone being sourced for Gilmour.”
Mullen and Gilmour discussed the “pros and cons” of using a Glock pistol or a shotgun.
Douglas, pleaded guilty to involvement in serious organised crime which included delivering the Glock to Gilmour as well as the trafficking of drugs.
The court heard that Douglas didn’t know he was delivering a firearm to Gilmour at the pub.
Gilmour admitted to the same crime, while Mullen pleaded guilty to a separate charge of directing organised crime involving drugs and guns.
It emerged Gilmour had previously been jailed for eight years for attempted murder in 2011.
This prompted lawyers for Douglas to go to the Court of Criminal appeal where Lord Pentland and Lord Boyd were told that their colleague didn’t follow the principles of comparative justice - that judge Brown should have given Douglas a lesser sentence because of his lack of previous offending in comparison to his co-accused and his more limited involvement in the scheme.
However, in the written judgment issued on Friday, Lord Pentland said judge Brown had acted correctly.
He wrote: “ We have given careful consideration to all the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant, but we are not persuaded that the sentence imposed on him was excessive.
“The offence to which he pled guilty was undoubtedly serious. He played a significant role in the activities of a serious organised crime group.
“His level of culpability was high, as was the potential for serious harm to be caused by what he agreed to do.
“The headline sentence for the appellant was 40 per cent lower than those selected for his two co-accused, the sentences for each of whom appear to us to have been relatively lenient.
“The appeal is refused.”
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