Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - indecent images - indecent assault - attempting to pervert the course of justice.

[2019]JRC060

Royal Court

(Samedi)

4 April 2019

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith, Esq., Commissioner, and Jurats Crill, Olsen, Ramsden, Dulake and Averty.

The Attorney General

-v-

Nathan Thomas John Jordan

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 25^th January, 2018 following guilty pleas to the following charges:

First Indictment

1 count of:

Making indecent photographs of children, contrary to Article 2(1)(a) of the Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994. (Count 1).

Second Indictment

2 counts of:

Indecent assault. (Count 2 and Count 5)

Third Indictment

1 count of:

Attempting to pervert the course of justice. (Count 1)

Age:  34.

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

First Indictment

In August 2012 police attended at the defendant's home address.  The defendant was arrested on suspicion of sexually assaulting Miss Y.  Among the items seized during a search of the address was a Dell Laptop which belonged to the defendant. 

 

The defendant was interviewed and confirmed that the laptop belonged to him. 

 

This laptop was forensically examined and four Indecent Images of Children (IIOC) were found (two at Level 4 and two at Level 5 on the Copine Scale). (Count 1).

 

Before the defendant could be charged he left the Island.

 

During 2015 and 2016 police were made aware that the defendant had been travelling to the UK and a warrant was sought for his arrest in the UK.  The defendant was eventually arrested in February 2018 and escorted back to Jersey. 

 

Second Indictment

 

Count 2

During July 2010, Miss Y was staying with the defendant one evening and they had an argument.  The defendant said he was going to bed. Miss Y subsequently followed, going to a separate bed (as there were two single beds in the one room).

 

Sometime later Miss Y was awoken by the defendant who was standing naked at the side of her bed demanding oral sex.  He told her that she had to give him oral sex or he would hurt her.  Miss Y refused.  The defendant kept insisting, becoming angrier.  Consequently, Miss Y, under duress and scared, gave the defendant oral sex. 

 

Afterwards Miss Y tried to leave, the defendant stopped her and threatened to take an overdose if she left.  Miss Y ran into the bathroom and the defendant followed her.   Once in the bathroom he pushed Miss Y up against the sink, put both hands around her neck and started to strangle her.  Miss Y managed to escape by telling the defendant that if he let her go there was a chance she would get back together with him.  Miss Y left the flat and walked to a nearby car park, she then rang her mother who picked her up. 

 

Later the defendant threw a brick at Miss Y's window and this incident was reported to the police.  The defendant admitted this offence and was given a written caution at St Helier Parish Hall. 

 

From September 2010 to July 2012, the defendant continued to contact Miss Y by text message, via Facebook, email and Twitter, despite her best efforts to block him.  Miss Y was terrified by some of the messages sent by the defendant and in August 2012 she made a complaint to the police in relation to the 'harassment' by the defendant and subsequently a statement of complaint about the indecent assault. 

 

The defendant was arrested and interviewed by the Police, but before he could be charged he left the Island. 

 

Count 5

On an unspecified date, between October 2011 and 31 August 2012 the defendant indecently assaulted Miss X. Miss X and the defendant were in the lounge in the flat, having had a disagreement a few minutes earlier.  After approximately 15 minutes the defendant asked Miss X to go through to the bedroom, which she refused.  The defendant again asked her to go through to the bedroom and said that everything was okay.  Miss X repeatedly said no as she "knew that he was going to use sex to punish me".  Miss X had already told the defendant she felt unwell with an upset stomach and knew the defendant was going to take out the anger on Miss X during sex. 

 

After anal sex to which she reluctantly agreed, the defendant then told Miss X to clean him up (by her using her mouth to clean his penis).  Miss X, who had never been asked to do this before by the defendant, replied by saying she did not want to as it was disgusting.  The defendant told Miss X to get on her knees and clean him up.  Due to the tone of voice, Miss X got on her knees.  As she did so she tried to pull her head away from the defendant's penis and told him she did not want to clean him up because she could get sick, as there were faeces on his penis.  Miss X took the defendant's penis into her mouth a little, half an inch or so, and tried not to let her tongue touch his penis.  Miss X then tried to pull her head away and said "I've done enough, I don't want to do it."  The defendant then pushed his hips towards Miss X.  Due to her disability Miss X could not bend far enough to get away from the defendant's penis.  So by the defendant pushing his hips forward it forced his faeces covered penis all the way into Miss X's mouth against her will. 

 

The defendant, who did not move his hips once his penis was in her mouth, told Miss X to use her tongue.  His penis was in her mouth for approximately 30 seconds.  Miss X was trying to pull back at which point the defendant said "OK" and pulled his penis out of her mouth. 

 

Subsequently the defendant made threats to Miss X and towards her new partner Mr B.  Miss X made a complaint about the harassment in April 2014 and made a complaint of sexual assault by the defendant in May 2015. 

 

During 2015 and 2016 police were made aware that the defendant had been travelling to the UK and a warrant was sought for his arrest in the UK.  The defendant was eventually arrested in February 2018 and escorted back to Jersey.  The defendant was interviewed and remanded in custody.

 

Third Indictment

In June/July 2018 the States of Jersey Police ("SOJP") were contacted by a then serving prisoner at HMP La Moye, in relation to concerns he had about the defendant and conversations he was having with his wife.  The matter was investigated and transcripts were obtained of phone calls made by the defendant, in particular of four conversations between the defendant and his wife on 4^th April 2018.  During these telephone calls the defendant was asking his wife to delete material from his 'cloud' account.  The material related to a chat group called "Woman's True Place".  This conversation took place 8 days after the defendant had been interviewed in relation to the allegations made by Miss X and he had been questioned about search terms found on the internet browsing history of his laptop.  It was clear from the transcripts that the defendant was concerned about this material being viewed by the prosecution and his own defence team.  

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 1:

2 years' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 2 of the Second Indictment.

Second Indictment

Count 2:	4 years' imprisonment.
Count 5:	5 years' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 2.

Third Indictment

Count 1:

12 months' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 5 of the Second Indictment.

Total:  10 years' imprisonment. 

Order sought under Article 5(1) of the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law that a period of 10 years elapse before the accused is permitted to apply to no longer be subject to the notification requirements to run from date of sentence. 

Restraining Order sought to commence from date of sentence for a period of 10 years under Article 10(4) with the following conditions:-

a)     That the defendant be prohibited from:

i.              Possessing any device capable of accessing the internet unless he has registered the device with the Offender Management Unit of the States of Jersey Police;

ii           Accessing the internet on any device unless his internet activity is monitored by an adult over the age of 21 who is aware of the accused's convictions and who does not have a conviction which would render him/her liable to notification under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010, and the history of that access is recorded, and he takes no steps to disguise, delete or otherwise conceal that history.

b)     That the defendant produce to an officer forthwith on request for examination, at any time, any computer or device which may access the internet, or any device which can store images electronically, which belongs to him or is in his possession, it being noted that such a request may be made anywhere, including by police attending at the defendant's place of residence;

c)     That the defendant provide advanced notification details of any proposed changes of address or employment that will have to be approved by the Offender Management Unit of the States of Jersey Police;

d)     That the defendant cannot refuse access to police officers who are monitoring or checking on his restraining orders, and he must allow officers entry to any premises he occupies or is in control of for the purposes of searching for relevant devices; 

e)     That the defendant may not knowingly contact or associate with anyone he knows to have been convicted of any offence which would render them liable to the notification requirements of the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 (not to come into force until the defendant is released from custody);

f)      That the defendant be prohibited from:

i.              Living in the same household as any person under the age of 16 unless with the express approval of the Offender Management Unit of the States of Jersey Police;

ii.             Contacting or attempting to contact, via any form of social media, internet or telecommunications system, any female he knows or believes to be under 16, unless there is a parent, guardian or responsible adult present who is over the age of 21, who is aware of the accused's convictions, and who does not have a conviction which would render him/her liable to notification under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010;

iii.            Being alone with any female child under the age of 16 years, aside from such contact which is inadvertent or unavoidable.  They will be considered to be alone if there is not a parent, guardian or responsible adult present who is over the age of 21, who is aware of the accused's convictions, and who does not have a conviction which would render him/her liable to notification under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010.

g)     That in circumstances where the defendant finds himself alone with a person under the age of 16, that he has a positive duty to remove himself from that situation as soon as reasonably possible;

Given the particular circumstances of the present case the Crown would also seek the following restrictive order in the following terms for an indeterminate period: 

h)     That the defendant be prohibited from approaching or contacting, directly or indirectly, Miss Y or Miss X . 

Forfeiture and destruction of all electronic devices containing indecent images, programs designed to encrypt or provide the user with anonymity on the internet, and programs designed to give the user access to the Darknet sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

First Indictment

Count 1:

18 months' imprisonment concurrent to Count 2 the Second Indictment.

Second Indictment

Count 2:	3 years' imprisonment.
Count 5:	4 years' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 2.

Third Indictment

Count 1:

12 month's imprisonment, concurrent to Count 5 the Second Indictment.

Total:  7 years' imprisonment. 

Order made under Article 5(1) of the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law that a period of 10 years elapse before the accused is permitted to apply to no longer be subject to the notification requirements to run from date of sentence. 

Restraining Order made in the terms sought to commence from date of sentence for a period of 10 years under Article 10(4) of the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law, 2010. 

Ordered that the not guilty pleas shall remain on file and the relevant Counts shall not be reinstated without leave of the Court; and

Granted the Attorney General liberty to apply in respect of the restraining order number 7 (listed as (h) above) above should he wish to make the order for an indeterminate period. 

Ordered the forfeiture and destruction of all electronic devices containing indecent material, programs designed to encrypt or provide the user with anonymity on the internet, and programs designed to give the user access to the Darknet. 

Ms. E. L. Hollywood, Crown Advocate.

Advocate C. Hall for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        We have had time to consider the sentence to impose, but not time to prepare a judgment and so we will be producing our reasons in a written judgment which will be issued as soon as possible, but we can say that of course we regard these offences as very serious and warranting a substantial sentence of imprisonment.  

2.        After careful deliberation we determine that a total sentence of 7 years is appropriate on the facts of this case and again our reasoning will be explained in the judgment that will follow. 

3.        First Indictment, Count 1, you are sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.  

4.        Second Indictment, Count 2 you are sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.  On Count 5 to 4 years' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 2. 

5.        Third Indictment, Count 1, you are sentenced to one years' imprisonment, concurrent, which makes a total sentence of 7 years imprisonment. 

6.        We order the forfeiture and destruction of the devices as set out in the conclusions.

7.        We order that the other offences be left on file not to be pursued by the Attorney General without leave of the Court. 

8.        In terms of the Sex Offenders legislation we give the Restraining Orders set in paragraph 50 of the Crown's conclusions, but as amended by those which I understand that Advocate Hollywood have supplied through to the Greffier, save that in relation to what was number 7, that is the prohibition from approaching the two victims, we have not had time to consider whether there is power under this law for such an order to stay in place for indeterminate period.  So, we are going to order that it should stay in place for 10 years from today's date but we give liberty to the Attorney General to bring the matter back before the Court if he wishes to seek an indeterminate period.  

9.        Finally, in relation to the notification requirements we agree with the Attorney General that 10 years should elapse before the defendant can apply to have those requirements dis-applied and that is from today's date.  

10.      Reasons to follow.  

Authorities

Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010.

Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994

AG-v-Godson and Crowley [2013 (2) JLR 1]

AG-v-Jalam [2015] JRC 169

AG-v-T [2016] JRC 001

AG-v-K [2016] JRC 158

AG-v-K and F [2016] JCA 219

AG-v-Laffoley [2017] JRC 058

AG-v-T [2017] JRC 169

AG-v-D [2018] JRC 109

Attorney General-v-D [2018] JRC 158

Sentencing Council Guidelines - assault by penetration