Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC114

Royal Court

(Samedi)

3 June 2011

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Fisher and Nicolle.

The Attorney General

-v-

Q

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

1 count of:	Grave and criminal assault (Count 1).
1 count of:	Affray (Count 2).

Age:  38.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

At the time of the incident the defendant was living with his wife and her two children, his relationship with the step-children is somewhat strained.

At about 2300 on 8^th February, 2011, the defendant and his step-daughter were arguing about some broken glass she had left outside her bedroom window in the garden.  He had been drinking and in his interview provided a surprisingly accurate assessment of how much he had consumed, suggesting that it was 23.5 units.  It is not in dispute that he was intoxicated.  He was annoyed that she had not cleaned up the glass and when he spoke to her about it she went to her bedroom and shut the door.  The defendant went outside, gathered up pieces of glass and put them in a plastic container.  He then went back into the house, opened her bedroom door and threw the container inside (Count 1).  While some of the glass hit her hand and caused a small 2mm cut on her hand, it is not the Crown case that the container was aimed at her but that it was thrown recklessly.  She then contacted the Police just after midnight while the defendant packed a bag and left the premises.

Police attended at 0005 and took statements.  The defendant was not found in the area and later said he had gone for a drink in a bar.  Soon afterwards he telephoned the Police and said that he was not going to return home that evening as he did not wish to be locked up.  By 0221 the defendant had returned home and Police attended at 0230.

When the entered, officers went to the foot of the stairs leading to the first floor, where the kitchen and lounge are situated.  They saw the defendant enter the kitchen and return holding a knife.  Officers told him to put the knife down.  At this time his wife was standing near him, his step-son was in his bedroom on the second floor, and step-daughter in her bedroom on the ground floor.

His wife made attempts to take the knife from him but was unsuccessful.  The defendant said words the effect of "what if I stab my wife?"  He then put the knife to his own throat and his wife went downstairs.  The defendant refused to put the knife down and threatened to stab the officers if they approached.  He then told them that his step-son was upstairs and threatened to stab him.  He then walked up to the second floor as officers ran up to the first.  He told the boy to come out of his room and go downstairs.  There was an exchange during which the defendant was abusive and stabbed the floor, banisters and ceiling with the knife and appeared to be blaming the Police for what was happening.  He then said he would rather stab the officers than go to prison, stood and began to walk quickly down the stairs holding the knife.  The officers were fearful of what he would do and CS gas was used.  The defendant backed up but did not release the knife, then fell to the ground where he was pinned down by a Police shield.  He threw the knife away and was secured with handcuffs and leg restraints as he was violently resisting arrest.

The defendant then admitted that he had a drink problem and that his relationship with his step-children was poor, describing them as "ungrateful little shits".  He said he had consumed several cans of lager during the evening and had thrown the plastic container into his step-daughter's room to make a point but not thrown it at her deliberately.  He said he had left the house after she had called the Police as he did not want to spend a night in the cells, but had returned after his wife had persuaded him.  He said he grabbed the knife to try to avoid being arrested and that if backed into a corner would have used it on Police.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, but no significant remorse and his victim empathy is described as limited.

Previous Convictions:

16 previous convictions for 36 offences, and include several offences of assault and drink-related offending.  There was a break in offending between 2006 and 2010, but the 2010 offence was again a grave and criminal assault against the step-daughter while drunk.  He was sentenced to 90 hours' community service and placed on probation for 12 months in April 2010.  He completed the community service but this offence places him in breach of the Probation Order which had approximately 2 months to run.

Conclusions:

Count 1:	6 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	18 months' imprisonment, consecutive.

Total: 2 years' imprisonment.

Exclusion Order for 1 year from date of release for 1^st, 4^th and 7^th category licensed premises sought.

Probation Order to be discharged.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	18 months' imprisonment, consecutive.

Total: 21 months' imprisonment.

Exclusion Order for 2 year from date of release for 1^st, 4^th and 7^th category licensed premises made.

Probation Order to be discharged.

R. C. P. Pedley, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. J. Haines for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are here in this Court to be sentenced on an Indictment containing two counts, one of grave and criminal assault and one of affray.  Of these two counts the Court is quite satisfied that it is the affray which is the more serious and the circumstances of the offending I will now recount just briefly. 

2.        In so far as the assault is concerned you recklessly threw pieces of glass in the general direction of your step-daughter.  We accept there was no real intention to injure her but you must realise now that you could have injured her; glass could have gone in her eye, it could have been quite serious and it was purely fortuitous that it was not.  The Court thinks that the circumstances justify a custodial sentence and that the right sentence to impose for that offence is 3 months' imprisonment. 

3.        The second count is that of affray and it is quite clear from the case that has been put before us that you completely lost your temper and acted in a way that was violent.  You threatened your wife; you threatened your step-children and, while it is true as your counsel said that at one stage you were threatening yourself, you also threatened police officers who were simply doing their duty.  Now you have rightly, through your counsel, expressed your apologies and the Court accepts that you are genuinely remorseful and indeed you have two sides to you, one when you have been drinking and one when you have not.  It is quite clear from all the reports that you have a serious problem with alcohol and it is one that you must address, because if you do not do so, things will get much worse for you, not just in terms of the likelihood of committing further offences but also for your health.  The Court notes all those matters but nonetheless, you are to be sentenced for what you have done and not for the fact that you have drinking problems. 

4.        Violence towards somebody in their home is very serious.  Violence with the use of a knife is very serious and the Court thinks that 18 months' imprisonment on the offence of affray is the right sentence to be imposed, notwithstanding all the mitigation which has been very ably put forward by your counsel, and which we have taken into account. 

5.        We have then gone on to look at whether or not the totality of the sentence is right, whether 21 months in all is the right total figure.  The Court thinks that it is the right total figure.  So you are sentenced to 3 months on Count 1 and 18 months on Count, consecutively, making a total of 21 months' imprisonment.  We note that you will be using the facilities provided at the prison, and we strongly recommend that you do this because the time that you spend up there can be used constructively in addressing the problems which you have. 

6.        Because of those problems the Court is also going to impose an Exclusion Order and in fact we are going to impose it for a longer period than has been contemplated by the Crown.  The maximum period under the law is 2 years and we think that that is the right period to impose and it is going to run from the date of your release and you are not to go into 1^st, 4^th or 7^th category licensed premises for a period of 2 years from the date of your release.  I warn you that if you were to breach that you would be liable to a fine not exceeding level 3, or 6 months' imprisonment, so it is a serious matter to breach the Exclusion Order. 

7.        The existing Probation Order which applies is discharged as requested by the Crown and we do not seek to impose any further sentence on the offence which gave rise to that Probation Order. 

8.        This was a nasty offence, I am sure you realise that and it will be down to you to make the efforts you can to control your use of alcohol. 

Authorities

AG-v-Horn [2010] JRC 104.

AG-v-W [2011] JRC 074.

AG-v-Du Four [2009] JRC 051.

AG-v-Barwise [2009] JRC 182.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JCA 046.