BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Jersey Unreported Judgments |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG v Green [2023] JRC 045 (21 March 2023) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2023/2023_045.html Cite as: [2023] JRC 45, [2023] JRC 045 |
||
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - Grave and criminal assault
|
Before : |
Sir Timothy Le Cocq, Bailiff, and Jurats Ramsden and Entwistle |
The Attorney General
-v-
Claire Lorraine Green
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges:
|
1 count of: |
Grave and criminal assault (Count 1). |
Age: 47.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
On 29 May 2022, the Defendant was seen, by members of the public, shouting at the Victim, with whom she was in a relationship at the time, about money. The Victim did not say anything in response. The Defendant then grabbed the Victim and punched him to the face with a closed fist five or six times before grabbing him by the neck or hair and pulling him to the ground. She then grabbed his waistband and dragged him down a set of three steps and kicked him in the chest and face five or six times, and punched him several times, while he lay on the ground.
A member of the public attempted to video record the incident on his mobile phone which caused the Defendant to stop assaulting the Victim. Two members of the public called 999 to report the incident.
The Victim did not provide a complaint. He had injuries to his face, hands and shoulders consisting of cuts and scrapes. The Police met the Victim the following day, who had developed significant bruising and swelling to his right eye, which he could barely open. He suspected he had broken ribs, however, he declined medical assessment so this was not confirmed.
Details of Mitigation:
Some benefit for guilty plea, albeit entered following indictment. Character references treated as significant. Personal circumstances.
Previous Convictions:
Previous convictions for common assault in 1995 and 2004. Written caution in 2003 for common assault.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
21 months' imprisonment. |
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
276 hours' Community Service Order equivalent to 21 months' imprisonment plus a 12 month Probation Order. |
Alcohol not considered as an aggravating factor in this case. Not a typical domestic violence case. No evidence of previous controlling behaviour. Long and slow burn provocation which caused you to commit these appalling assaults. Exceptional personal circumstances.
Ms L. B. Hallam, Crown Advocate.
Advocate R. Tremoceiro for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE BAILIFF:
1. You are to be sentenced today for one count of grave and criminal assault committed on your partner on the evening of 29 May 2022. The assault was witnessed by a number of members of the public who heard you shouting at the Victim about money. You appeared to be angry. You were seen to grab him, punch him to the face five or six times then grabbed him by the neck or hair and pulled him to the ground. You grabbed his waist band and dragged him down a set of three steps and then kicked him in the chest and face five or six times. You punched him several times whilst he lay on the ground. During that you continued to shout at him. You only stopped when one of the members of the public began to film you and told you it was because he was going to show the police.
2. Your victim did not appear to resist your assault in anyway nor did he fight back and he sustained a number of injuries to his hands face and shoulders and afterwards developed significant bruising and could barely open his right eye. He also sustained bruising and grazes to his torso and a large graze to his right shoulder. When you were interviewed under caution on 30 May you answered, "no comment".
3. We have regard to the Crown's analysis of the case using the factors set out in Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111. This was clearly a deliberate and sustained assault and there were numerous and forceful blows. You did not deliberately bring a weapon but the Crown has reminded us of AG v Nolan [2002] JLR Note 31 in which the Court expressed the view that a person "who kicks or stamps on his victim's head with shod feet commits a serious assault equivalent to an assault with a weapon." We are not sure in these circumstances whether that is directly applicable in your case given that it appears to be that you were wearing something closer to sandals than fully shod feet. We do note however that in AG v Mendonca [2006] JRC 066 the Court commented that those who kick others "to the head when a person is on the ground can expect a substantial prison sentence."
4. This has been characterised to us as an alcohol fuelled attack but we are persuaded by your counsel that we should not consider this fully as such. It is clear that the Victim was in drink but it is less certain that we can be satisfied that you were in drink at all or certainly to an extent that would cause us to describe this as alcohol fuelled.
5. The Crown has also quite rightly drawn our attention to Coelho v AG [2020] JRC 216 in which the Court of Appeal considered that the awareness of the effect on the community as a whole of domestic abuse and violence has caused a hardening of attitudes and cases of that nature will often be met with sentences of imprisonment. We have considered this but we are aware of the fact that this is not a typical domestic violence case in the sense of violence perpetrated within an ongoing course of conduct and in a relationship. There were somewhat unusual features which we will make reference to in just a moment.
6. You do not have a good record, but equally you do not have any recent convictions for violence. You have some benefit for a guilty plea but we note the nature of your original basis of plea which the Crown quite properly in the circumstances did not accept. Accordingly the Crown was put to the preparation of a full prosecution case and we generally endorse the approach taken by the Deputy Bailiff in AG v Goncalves [2022] JRC 097 that to receive a full credit for a guilty plea the plea must be entered in the Magistrate's Court. We do not state that as a hard and fast rule because there may be circumstances in which that is not applicable but as a general approach that seems to us to be entirely appropriate. Nonetheless you are entitled to some benefit for your guilty plea.
7. We note the contents of the Pre-Sentencing Report which the Court has found extremely helpful and although you are assessed at being at low risk of reconviction you were at moderate risk of perpetrating further domestic violence which is of course a matter of some concern. The question for us then is whether we can consider the circumstances of this case to be sufficiently exceptional to depart from the clear policy of the Court for imprisonment for offences of this nature.
8. In order to help us with this we look to an extent to the personal mitigation available to you. We will not go into it in detail but as your counsel has referred to it and as we have read it ourselves there are many many references and all speak extremely well of you, some exceptionally well, and give you a positive good character that we are entitled and do take into account. This seems to us to be a very significant matter that we should give regard to. It speaks to the work that you do in the community and your general supporting and caring nature.
9. We do give some weight to the effect that imprisonment would have on your family but you will have heard the policy of the Court and the reasons for that policy. Nonetheless we accept that your family circumstances are not typical ones and we have given some weight in considering whether we can consider that exceptional circumstances have been reached and as we say the contents of the Pre-Sentencing Report have been helpful to us.
10. In all of these circumstances we think that we can find exceptional circumstances in this case. We do that because we do not consider this to be a typical case of domestic violence and we do not think we can safely proceed on the basis that it was alcohol fuelled. Our view of this matter is that it was a long and slow burn provocation which effectively caused you to commit these quite appalling assaults. We are assisted in that enormously by the position taken by the Victim himself where he clearly puts the large amount of blame on himself and clearly asks that we do not punish you for what he sees to a great extent is his own failings and we are prepared to give that the weight that we think it deserves.
11. In the circumstances we are not going to impose a custodial sentence on you. These are entirely exceptional circumstances and we do not step back from the stated policy of the Court in any way at all. You are extremely fortunate, but you are fortunate because you have many good things that may be said about you and we are sure that you are aware that those things being said now could no longer be said if this happens again.
12. You are sentenced to a 12 month Probation Order with 276 hours of Community Service, the equivalent of 21 months' imprisonment, do you understand?
