Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC103

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

20^th May 2011

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Clapham and Milner.

The Attorney General

-v-

Lee Jon Baker (aka Lee Jon Scott)

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

1 count of:	Driving without a licence, contrary to Article 4(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Grave and criminal assault (Count 2).

Age:  39.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant and the victim, who is his "on again, off again" partner, were at the defendant's home.  They had both been drinking.  The victim was lying on the bed, wearing two jumpers but with the lower half of his body unclothed when without warning the defendant poured a full kettle of boiling water over his genital area.  He immediately jumped up in extreme pain, got dressed and walked home.  Once there he showed a friend the burns and then called an ambulance. 

Two days later the victim contacted the police and made a complaint against the defendant for assaulting him.  A statement was recorded in the presence of an appropriate adult as the victim suffers from learning disabilities as well as schizophrenia and other mental health problems and has learning difficulties.  The defendant was then arrested at his home address.  In response to the caution he said "I've got burns too".  He was uncooperative, and swore at the police officers.  He was therefore restrained on the floor and was handcuffed to the rear.  He was then transferred to Police Headquarters and whilst being processed by the custody sergeant said "He poured boiling water on me and have to go to hospital or that". 

In interview the defendant initially denied having deliberately injured the victim.  He claimed that it had been an accident involving hot water from the tap.  The officers challenged him as this was not consistent with the injuries.  The victim's account was put to him and he said that he did not know why he had accused the victim of throwing boiling water on him.  He eventually admitted that he had deliberately boiled a kettle and thrown it over the victim.  He said he had done this as he had been told that the victim was a child abuser, but admitted that he does not know whether this is true or not.  He said that drink changes him. 

The victim suffered partial thickness burns to his abdomen, groin, left buttock and left hand, totalling approximately 17% of his body surface area.  He was treated with fluid replacement and analgesia and the wounds were dressed.  His penis was covered with petroleum jelly and he was advised that his hand should be placed in a petroleum bag, but he declined.  He also declined the recommended catheter.  He was admitted under the surgical team as the extensive nature of his burns required further fluid replacement and dressings.  The victim discharged himself against medical advice the same day.  The wounds will heal with time, care and regular dressings.  However, there will be residual scarring, and if the wounds become infected this may be worse. 

The defendant gave differing accounts to the probation officer and forensic psychologist, both of which minimised his culpability.  He casts himself in a victim role, more concerned with his own injuries than the victim's and focussing on his wish to avoid prison. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.  Gender identity disorder; mental health problems.  Expressed remorse in a letter dated the day before sentencing. 

Previous Convictions:

Eleven convictions for twenty seven offences, including three common assaults, two assaults on police and one grave and criminal assault. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	£50 fine or 1 day's imprisonment in default.
Count 2:	3½ years' imprisonment.

Total:  3½ years' imprisonment plus £50 fine. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

This was a serious grave and criminal assault and the Court is in no doubt that imprisonment is necessary.  Taking into account the defendant's "challenging circumstances" the conclusions would be reduced. 

Count 1:	£50 fine or 1 day's imprisonment in default.
Count 2:	2½ years' imprisonment, concurrent with any default sentence on Count 1.

Total:  2½ years' imprisonment plus £50. 

C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Mr Baker you are here to be sentenced on an Indictment which contains two counts, one, driving without a licence and the other, grave and criminal assault.  Clearly the grave and criminal assault charge is the serious one that we have to deal with today. 

2.        The facts are that at your home on 5^th February, 2011, your partner was there with you.  It appears that you might both have been drinking, and without warning, without planning, without provocation, you poured a kettle of boiling water over his abdomen and genital area. 

3.        That was a very serious grave and criminal assault and the Court sentences you for what you have done because it was such a serious assault.  We have given anxious consideration to everything that your counsel has said and carefully reviewed the background report and the psychological report that has been prepared, but the Court is in no doubt at all that the custody threshold is passed and that a prison sentence must be imposed.  Violence to a partner is as bad as violence to anyone else.  Domestic assaults are treated as seriously as any other form of assault and the Court wishes to send a clear message to the community in that respect. 

4.        The Court does not consider that this was some kind of vigilante assault and we have disregarded that possibility completely.  We do not therefore treat that as an aggravating factor.  We have taken into account that the victim has forgiven you.  That the victim has forgiven you speaks very well for the victim and we note that he is in Court today and that your mother is in Court today.  It does not seem to us to be a very substantial point of mitigation for you and you are very fortunate to have someone who has been so forgiving, but on the basis of that forgiveness we take it that the victim recognises good qualities in you and we do allow you some credit for that.  Your guilty plea is clearly a valuable plea particularly in the light of the withdrawal of the complaint by the victim and we give you full credit for that, and we have taken into account all of the challenging circumstances which affect you and your life.  But nonetheless we are left with the fact that this was a very serious grave and criminal assault.  We are going to send you to prison for 2½ years and we suggest that you take advantage in prison of all the help that you will be offered including the psychological services that will be available to you. 

5.        In the circumstances, you are sentenced on Count 1 of the Indictment, as moved for by the Crown, to a fine of £50 or 1 day's imprisonment in default, and on Count 2 to 2½ years' imprisonment, which will run concurrently with any default sentence on Count 1. 

Authorities

Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1056.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

AG-v-Letchford 2000/173A.

AG-v-Picot [2009] JRC 196.

AG-v-Debieuvre [2010] JRC 125.

Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2000) (George Hayles) [2001] 1 Cr. App. R. (S) 26.

R-v-M [2005] EWCA Crim 2986.

AG-v-Cabot 2000/55B.

R-v-Smith-Bryant & Ors (1989) 11 Cr. App. R. (S) 49.

Attorney General's Reference Nos. 17 & 18 of 1994 (Chamberlain & Or) (1995) 16 Cr. App. R. (S) 418.

Evans & Phillips-v-AG 1997/65.

R-v-Nall-Cain [1998] 2 Cr. App. R. (S) 145.