284. The Appeals Chamber notes that, in determining the sentence, the Trial Chamber expressly took into account Ntabakuze’s family situation and his lengthy public service to his country as a military officer, as well as his social, educational, and professional background.[1] The Trial Chamber, however, concluded that the gravity of the crimes and the aggravating factors greatly outweighed these mitigating factors.[2] The Appeals Chamber recalls that in general only little weight is afforded to the family situation of the convicted person in the absence of exceptional family circumstances.[3] Similarly, the lack of a previous criminal record and a purported likelihood of successful rehabilitation are common characteristics among many convicted persons which are accorded little weight, if any, in mitigation in the absence of exceptional circumstances.[4] As for Ntabakuze’s “exemplary” military career, the Appeals Chamber also considers that it was in the Trial Chamber’s discretion not to accord this factor any mitigating value in the absence of particular reasons for doing so. Ntabakuze does not submit that exceptional circumstances obliged the Trial Chamber to accord special value to any of the factors listed above.