Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC107

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

1^st June 2011

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith, Commissioner, and Jurats Le Cornu, Morgan, Fisher, Nicolle, Crill and Le Brocq.

The Attorney General

-v-

Paul Allan Slater

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 11^th March, 2011, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

1 count of:	Obstructing a police officer (Count 1).
1 count of:	Grave and criminal assault (Count 2).

Age:  23.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Count 1

In November 2010, police officers were outside Pure nightclub carrying out an arrest.  During the arrest the defendant persistently intervened and attempted to prevent the police officers from placing the man into the police van.  The defendant was instructed to leave but refused and became even more volatile.  He was arrested for refusing to obey lawful orders. 

Count 2

During December 2010 the defendant, the victim and a mutual friend (who all share a flat together) were out drinking.  The defendant's ex girlfriend, the sister of the mutual friend, was also there.  The victim went home just after midnight with the defendant's ex girlfriend returning there shortly afterwards.  Shortly afterwards the defendant sent the victim a text message warning him to stay away from his ex girlfriend as he thought they had started a relationship together. 

Shortly afterwards the ex girlfriend saw the defendant climbing through a window to enter the flat.  The defendant went into the living room where the victim was on the sofa bed, picked up a "Rambo-style" hunting knife that belonged to the mutual friend, and "went" at the victim as he lay on the sofa bed. 

The victim tried to protect himself and lifted his arms and legs up in defence whilst the defendant stabbed the knife through the duvet into the victim's foot.  The defendant was eventually disarmed by the ex girlfriend and the victim attended Accident and Emergency.  The victim suffered a four centimetre laceration on the top of his right foot and the tibialis anterior tendon had been cut.  The defendant was subsequently arrested however the victim refused to make a formal complaint. 

Details of Mitigation:

The defendant pleaded guilty, was remorseful and benefited from residual youth.  This was more of a crime of passion; the knife did not belong to the defendant who had used it spontaneously.  No previous convictions for violence.  Defendant doing well in prison on various courses and had the support of his family who had flown from England to attend sentencing. 

Previous Convictions:

Two previous convictions, both of which were recorded in Preston earlier in 2010 (possession of cannabis with intent to supply, and breach of the suspended sentence ordered for the drugs offence). 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	2 weeks' imprisonment.
Count 2:	8 years starting point.  4 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  4 years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the knife sought. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court noted the cases on varied on starting points for grave and criminal assault however had gleaned a starting point of between 6-8 years.  Reiterated AG-v-Lawlor and knife crime would attract a severe sentence. 

Count 1:	2 weeks' imprisonment.
Count 2:	3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  3 years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the knife ordered. 

Ms E. L. Hollywood, Crown Advocate.

Advocate C. R. Baglin for the defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        After a day's drinking the defendant returned to his flat and went to the living room where the victim, with whom he shared the flat, was on the sofa bed under a duvet.  Jealous that the victim had commenced a relationship with his former girlfriend, who was also present in the flat, the defendant picked up a Rambo-style hunting knife and went at the victim on the sofa.  The victim attempted to defend himself and lifted his arms and legs in defence.  Whilst doing this the defendant stabbed through the duvet into the victim's foot.  On examination at the Accident and Emergency Department, the victim had a four centimetre laceration at the top of his right foot; the tibialis anterior tendon had been cut.  The victim failed to follow up with hospital appointments and has refused to co-operate with the police from that time.  To date he has refused to make a formal complaint. 

2.        On interview the defendant declined to answer all questions that were put to him.  In addition to this grave and criminal assault the defendant also stands to be sentenced for obstructing a police officer on an earlier occasion.  The defendant is assessed at a medium risk of re-offending; he has no previous convictions for violence but there is a warrant out for his arrest in England for his failing to complete community service in that jurisdiction. 

3.        The Crown have drawn our attention to the case of AG-v-Lawlor [2009] JRC 150 where the Bailiff said this at paragraph 6:-

"We have taken note of the various cases to which we referred and to the extract from Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey and we also noted the cases of AG-v-Farnon [2009] JRC 127.  But each case turns on its own facts and some of the cases in Whelan are now quite old.  The courts in England recently have made it clear that courts must respond to changing situations and to the risk of increasing knife violence.  We are fortunate in Jersey so far that we are not facing the sort of problems which many areas of England are facing in relation to knives but the Court takes a very serious view of any assault with a knife.  The gravity of injury when a knife is used is so often a matter of chance and there is always a risk of really serious injury if not worse.  The Court is determined to send out a message that those who resort to attacks with a knife will face severe sentences. 

4.        Accordingly the Crown invites us to make a firm deterrent sentence seeking a starting point of 8 years' imprisonment and a sentence, after mitigation, of 4 years with a concurrent sentence for the obstruction. 

5.        The Crown has referred us to the well known criteria in Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.  The Crown notes that prior to returning home the defendant sent the victim a text warning him to stay away from his former girlfriend, but because of the level of intoxication, the Crown is prepared to accept, as do we, that there was no real pre-meditation.  However the Crown point out that of course intoxication is an aggravating factor. 

6.        There is a lack of consistency on the part of the Courts in the use of starting points in cases involving assaults generally, notwithstanding the guidance given in the case of Harrison-v-AG.  We have been referred to a number of cases by both counsel who agree that for assaults involving a knife, a band of between 6 and 8 years can be gleaned.  The Crown have put this case at the upper end of the band, but in our view there are two factors which should place the case at the lower end of this band; firstly the accepted lack of premeditation.  The defendant found his recently former girlfriend in the flat with the victim and he used the knife, belonging to the girlfriend's brother, spontaneously.  Secondly, the attack was not sustained; he was in fact, as we understand it, disarmed by his former girlfriend.  We therefore think that a starting point of around 6 years is correct on the facts of this case. 

7.        In terms of mitigation we have taken into account the plea of guilty; the Crown say that there was a lack of cooperation but we note that this was as a result of legal advice given to the defendant at the time.  He has no previous convictions for violence and is still relatively young at the age of 22; at least he was 22 at the time that the offences were committed.  We are very encouraged by the very positive attitude you have taken to your time in prison and we wish to encourage you in that and we also note the support of your family who have come over here to be in Court today.  We have considered carefully everything said by your counsel most ably in mitigation.  We wish to reiterate however what the Bailiff said in the case of AG-v-Lawlor "that those who resort to attacks with a knife will face severe sentences" and we would like to repeat that message. 

8.        You are sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment on Count 2 and you are sentenced to 2 weeks' imprisonment on Count 1, concurrent, which makes a total sentence of 3 years' imprisonment. 

9.        We order the forfeiture and destruction of the knife. 

Authorities

Criminal Justice (Forfeiture Orders)(Jersey) Law 2001.

AG-v-Lawlor [2009] JRC 150.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

AG-v-Hare [2008] JRC 168.

AG-v-Livingstone [2010] JRC 028.