Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC001

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

2^nd January 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Alan James Ford

 

 

1 count of:	Being drunk and disorderly on licensed premises, contrary to Article 83 of the Licensing (Jersey) Law, 1974 (count 1).
1 count of:	Violently resisting police in execution of their duty (count 2).
1 count of:	Breach of licensed premises exclusion order, contrary to Article 3 of the Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons) (Jersey) Law 1998 (count 3).

 

Breach of a 12 months' Probation Order, with 12 months' exclusion from all licensed premises save for 6^th category, made by Royal Court on 3^rd October (see [2003]JRC171), following guilty plea to 1 count of being in an intoxicated condition in an aerodrome (Count 1); 1 count of violently resisting police (count 2); and 1 count of grave and criminal assault (count 3).

 

Age:     24,

 

Plea:    Guilty; breach admitted.

 

Details of Offence:

On 3rd October, 2003, Ford was released from custody following the Royal Court imposing a Probation Order and an Exclusion Order from licensed premises upon him both Orders to run for 12 months.  The Exclusion Order had been imposed in part to assist Ford in overcoming his alcohol problem as mitigation has been put forward on Ford's behalf to the effect that he wished to confront and overcome his alcohol problem.

At 21.30 hours that same day the licensee of the Gloucester Vaults Public House spoke to Ford who was in a drunken condition.  He had only purchased one pint on those premises.  The licensee asked him to leave on a number of occasions but Ford refused and when advised that the Police were being called he knocked an ice bucket and his own pint off the bar onto the floor.  Upon the Police being summoned Ford became violent and in particular resisted the officers preventing them from putting him in handcuffs.  He was abusive and it required 3 officers to handcuff him and place him in a police van.  Upon arrival at the Police Station he refused to get out of the van and had to be physically removed.  Whilst in the detention room he spat at the Custody Sergeant and continued to be violent and struggled and spat at other officers whilst they cell placed him.  His abusive and aggressive demeanour continued throughout his time in Police custody.

This was a blatant breach of the Royal Court's Order and Ford's behaviour was once again nothing short of disgusting.  The updated Social Enquiry Report revealed that Ford had stated that at the earlier hearing he would have said anything to get out of custody and in the light of that comment, the Crown treated with considerable cynicism the statements previously made by Ford expressing regret or remorse for his earlier actions particularly in relation to the assault upon the Police officer.  The Crown treated his earlier words as simply empty words.  An excessive consumption of alcohol was once again an aggravating factor in relation to these offences.

 

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown for the reasons outlined above did not feel bound by the earlier Conclusions moved for in relation to the Grave and Criminal count which was before the Royal Court on the 3^rd October, 2003.  However, the Crown had taken into account the guilty pleas and the period that Ford had spent on remand in relation to an unrelated offence of which he had been acquitted by a jury.

The Defence acknowledged that insofar as concerned non-custodial options Ford had burnt his bridges.  Ford clearly had problems with alcohol and aggression and he was not able to manage to control his temper, nor did he appear to be coping particularly well with the relatively recent death of his mother.  Defence Counsel concentrated her address on the length of custodial sentence.  She emphasised the time spent on remand which did not count towards his sentence because it was time spent in relation to a charge which he has been acquitted following a trial.  That time would not therefore count towards his ultimate sentence.  The Defence asked the Court to exercise its discretion and make an allowance for the two month period which would not be taken into account.

Ford also had mitigation from the guilty pleas and residual credit for his youth.  The earlier offences had to be seen against the traumatic events of his mother's death.

It was contended that the 18 month conclusion sought by the Crown were excessive as was the 12 month Exclusion Order.  This was simply setting him up to fail.  The defence continued that an overall sentence of 12 months was appropriate from which a further reduction should be made for the time on remand.  Having regard to the time already served, it was suggested that a binding over to leave the Island might be a more appropriate sentence allowing him to start somewhere afresh as Ford had a serious record of offending in Jersey and something of a reputation  A letter from Ford was handed up to the Court for its consideration.

 

Previous Convictions:

Numerous including numerous for dishonesty, public order, assaults, including assault on a Police officer and resisting arrest on a number of occasions.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Breach:	12 months' imprisonment, to follow other sentences consecutively.
TOTAL:	1½ years' imprisonment; 12 months' exclusion order to run from date of release.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Defendant had been given a chance on the 3^rd October, 2003, by the Royal Court so as to make a new start.  He had been warned if he did not behave and went on to licensed premises then he would likely go to prison.  He disregarded this and was in clear contempt of the Court Order.  Within hours, he went onto licensed premises.  He was violent and aggressive towards the Police who came to carry out their duty.  There was no option other than to sentence him to an immediate period of imprisonment. The Court had taken into account the available mitigation including credit for a guilty plea and had made an allowance for time spent on remand which would not count towards the sentence.

 

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment
Count 2:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 3:	3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Breach:	9 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
TOTAL:	1 year's imprisonment; 12 months' exclusion order (save for 6th Category Licences) to run from 2nd January, 2004.  Previous Probation and Exclusion Orders discharged.

 

 

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S.E. Fitz for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        I am not going to repeat everything the Court said to you on 3^rd October, last year.  At that time you were given a chance to make a new start.  You were warned that, if you did not behave yourself and that if you did go into licensed premises, you would very likely end up in prison.  You showed disrespect, indeed contempt, for the order of the Court as within hours you were drunk on licensed premises, making a nuisance of yourself and in addition you were violent and aggressive with police officers who were only doing their job.

2.        We have no option now but to sentence you to imprisonment.  We have taken into account all the submissions made by your counsel.  You are entitled to credit for your guilty pleas.  We also take into account the time spent in custody on remand, and will give some allowance for the fact that the time spent on remand before the 3^rd October, will not count against the sentence which we are about to impose.

3.        We also take account of all the other mitigation available to you and outlined by your counsel.  Taking all those matters into account the sentence of the Court is as follows.  So far as this indictment is concerned you will be sentenced on count 1 to 3 months' imprisonment, on count 2 to 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent, and on count 3 to 3 months' imprisonment concurrent, making a total of 3 months' imprisonment on the current indictment.  So far as the indictment for which you were sentenced on the 3^rd October, 2003, is concerned you will be sentenced on count 1 to 3 months' imprisonment, on count 2 to 9 months' imprisonment and on count 3 to 9 months' imprisonment, all those sentences to run concurrently with each other but consecutively to the sentences on this indictment making a total of 12 months' imprisonment.

4.        We also impose an exclusion order to date from today excluding you from licensed premises except those premises holding a 6^th category licence of 12 months.  We appreciate, of course, that this order will have no practical effect if you do decide to leave the Island after you have served your sentence of imprisonment.  While you remain in the Island, this will be in force and you must obey it, and if you do not, then obviously you will be at risk of further punishment. 

5.        We discharge the Probation Order and we discharge the exclusion order imposed on the 3^rd October, 2003. 

Authorities

A.G. -v- Ford [2003]JRC171.

Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons) (Jersey) Law 1998.