The murderer of Zara Aleena has won a Court of Appeal bid to reduce the minimum term of his life sentence.

Jordan McSweeney killed the 35-year-old law graduate as she walked home from a night out in Ilford, east London, early on June 26 last year.

McSweeney, who refused to attend his sentencing hearing last December, was handed a life sentence with a minimum term of 38 years after admitting Ms Aleena’s murder and sexual assault.

Last month, he began legal action to reduce the minimum term of his sentence, appearing for the start of appeal proceedings via videolink from Long Lartin prison in Worcestershire.

In a ruling on Friday, three judges at the court in London allowed McSweeney’s appeal, finding that the sentencing judge had imposed too high an “uplift” to the minimum term, replacing it with a life sentence with a minimum term of 33 years.

The Lady Chief Justice Lady Carr, sitting with Mrs Justice McGowan and Mrs Justice Ellenbogen, said: “Having correctly found that Ms Aleena must have been rendered unconscious at an early stage in the attack, the judge had lacked a sufficient evidential basis on which to be sure that there had been additional mental or physical suffering such as to justify an increase in the 30-year starting point.”

McSweeney’s barrister George Carter-Stephenson KC said: “At the outset can I make it clear that it is accepted that the attack and murder in this case was particularly savage and brutal, and nothing I intend to say in this address is in any way meant to detract from that.”

The barrister said the sentencing judge, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb, had wrongly factored in the “aggravating features” in the case.

Mr Carter-Stephenson said it was accepted there was a sexual motive to the crime, but argued the murder itself was not premeditated.

‘An opportunistic act’

He added: “The attack was an opportunistic act rather than anything that was planned in advance, though there was clearly a sexual encounter in mind.

“He planned to look for a sexual encounter, with or without consent.”

However, Oliver Glasgow KC, for the Crown Prosecution Service, said the suggestion McSweeney had not intended to kill Ms Aleena was “unsustainable”.

He told the court McSweeney had spent two hours stalking several women before turning his attention to Ms Aleena.

Mr Glasgow said in written submissions: “The submission that the intention to murder Ms Aleena was formed ‘on the spur of the moment’ flies in the face of the applicant’s behaviour preceding the violence.

“The sexual assault of Ms Aleena was the culmination of hours of planning and premeditation.”

The Old Bailey previously heard McSweeney stalked Ms Aleena along Cranbrook Road before grabbing her from behind and dragging her into a driveway.

The attack, caught on grainy CCTV, lasted nine minutes and resulted in 46 separate injuries.

Ms Aleena, who was training to be a solicitor, was found struggling to breathe and later died in hospital.

Mr Glasgow described the attack as “utterly abhorrent” and said the sentencing judge was right to find McSweeney had no mitigation aside from his guilty pleas.

The Lady Chief Justice Lady Carr said there had been “ample evidence” to say McSweeney was a “pugnacious and violent man”.

She continued in her summary of the appeal court’s decision: “The judge had taken appropriate account of the evidence of his mental health and background and had been entitled to conclude that it offered no excuse or explanation for offences of such gravity, so as to reduce his culpability, or to provide meaningful mitigation.

“McSweeney’s disengagement with the court process had entitled her to conclude that remorse was not available as a mitigating factor and her approach to credit for his guilty plea could not be criticised.”

The senior judge added: “We pay tribute to Ms Aleena and her family. We observe that no sentence for murder can ever reflect the value of the life taken away or attempt to do so.”

‘Disheartening message to women’

The family of  Aleena described the minimum sentence reduction for her killer a “shallow triumph” which sends a “disheartening” message to women as they branded him a “repugnant man”.

In a statement issued by Farah Naz, Ms Aleena’s aunt, they said: “Today’s decision, a decision to reduce the minimum sentence for that repugnant man, aligns with an established legal sentencing framework, a framework we comprehend.

“Yet, the message it conveys to women is disheartening, suggesting that a ‘life sentence’ may not truly mean a lifetime behind bars. It is, in all honesty, a shallow triumph for him.

“Despite his sentencing to a minimum of 33 years, his time in incarceration has been marred by abhorrent conduct, marked by a lack of remorse and a callous attitude toward others. The prospect of his release after 33 years remains slim, but, naturally, we hope he remains imprisoned for life.”