𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

The sister of a woman stabbed more than 100 times by her killer has warned “justice shouldn’t have an expiry date” as she demanded MPs scrap a 28-day deadline for appeals against sentences. Sasha Marsden, from Blackpool, was stabbed in head and neck and set on fire after being lured to her death in Blackpool on the false promise of a job.

David Minto, who is serving a minimum 35-year prison term for her murder, sexually assaulted and stabbed the 16-year-old in a frenzied attack in 2013. Minto was not given a whole life order for his crimes, meaning he could be released in 2048, when he is 57 years old. Sasha’s sister Katie Brett has taken aim at the 28-day deadline imposed on her family to decide whether to appeal the unduly lenient sentence of the man who “destroyed our lives”.

Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick echoed her calls, saying “evil” criminals like Sasha’s killer should never be let off the hook with lenient sentences on a “little-known technicality”.

Writing in the Daily Express, she said: “Twenty-eight days — the same amount of time you have to return something to a shop.”
This week, the Sentencing Bill returns to Parliament, and MPs will have only a brief window to act.

Katie is calling for the MP to review the deadline to appeal as families of victims are often still grieving for their loved ones and are unfamiliar with the legal system.

She added: “The deadline for victims and their families to appeal unduly lenient sentences must be extended, and there must be a legal duty to ensure they are properly informed of their rights at the end of a trial. Justice shouldn’t have an expiry date.”

Minto, then 22, dumped Sasha’s body – wrapped in a bin liner and carpet underlay – in an alleyway near the Grafton House Hotel.

The injuries inflicted on the teenager, from Staining, near Blackpool, were so severe that she had to be identified by DNA from her toothbrush.

Minto, who raped Sasha while she was dead or dying, briefly met the college student through a mutual friend.

He eventually contacted Sasha online, asking if she was interested in a part-time job at a hotel, even though he had no authority to do so.

The killer launched a vicious attack on the girl when she went to the hotel for a tour.

On Tuesday, the Conservatives tabled an amendment to the Sentencing Bill to extend the period of an appeal for a victim or the family of deceased victims to a year.

They are also hoping to double the time for members of the public from 28 days to 56 days.

The Unduly Lenient Sentence (ULS) scheme allows anyone to ask for certain sentences to be looked at by the Attorney General’s Office, who will then refer it to the Court of Appeal if they think it is not tough enough.

But a referral to the Court of Appeal has to be made within 28 days of the date of sentence.

Katie previously told how her and her mother, Jayne Marsden, who died in March last year aged 56, did not know the length of Minto’s sentence could be appealed against and were not told.

Mr Jenrick said: “It is deeply unfair that victims still reeling from traumatic court cases have just 28 days to appeal their abuser’s sentence.

“That’s why we would change the law to give victims a year to appeal sentences – and double the amount of time ordinary members of the public have to lodge an appeal.

“Evil criminals, like Sasha’s killer, should never be let off the hook with lenient sentences on a little-known technicality. I urge Labour to do the right thing and accept our amendment to put victims and their families back at the heart of the criminal justice system.”

London’s victim commissioner Claire Waxman said earlier this year that she was “appalled” by the difference in treatment for offenders and victims during the appeals process.

She has called for law changes to make the system fairer.

Offenders can mount appeals against their sentences weeks or even months after the 28-day deadline, and can be granted a Royal Courts of Justice hearing even if there is no justification for the late appeal.

Speaking in April, she said: “The disparity in rights between victims and offenders is glaringly clear in the case of appeals.”

The Ministry of Justice has been contacted for comment.