ROYAL COURT
(Samedi Division)
7 August 1998
Before: F C Hamon Esq Deputy Bailiff and
Jurats Potter and Le Brocq
AG -v- Laurence Anthony Durkin
FIRST INDICTMENT:
1 count of: larceny ( count 1):
1 count of: aiding, assisting or participating in larceny ( count 20A).
17 counts of: obtaining property by false pretences (counts 2 - 18, inclusive)
1 count of: obtaining money by false pretences (count 19).
Age: 21 years, 2 months
Plea:count 1: Not guilty, but guilty to aiding, assisting, or participating in larceny; guilty to remaining counts. (which plea the Crown accepted.)
Details of Offence:
Received stolen switch card and between 2nd and 8th September, 1997, used the card to obtain goods to the value of £815.56 and cash (£10). Luxury items purchased including champagne and cigarettes which were consumed by Durkin and/or friends.
Details of Mitigation: See below
Previous Convictions: See below
Conclusions: count 1 - 19: 9 month’s imprisonment on each count, concurrent.
count 20A: 3 months’ imprisonment, concurrent.
SECOND INDICTMENT:
4 counts of:possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey ) Law 1987.
count 1: cannabis resin
count 4: diamorphine
count 5: diamorphine
count 6: cannabis resin
2 counts of: permitting smoking of cannabis on premises of which he is occupier, contrary to Article 9(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (counts 2,3);
1 count of: possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply it to another, contrary to Article 6(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.
count 7 : cannabis resin.
(The Crown withdrew Count 6 from the Indictment].
Plea: Guilty
Details of Offence:
Found in possession of personal quantities of controlled drugs following execution of search warrant at his home address in July and October, 1997, and February, 1998. Found in possession of personal quantity of heroin in St. Helier in March, 1998, and following execution of search warrant at his home address a 9 ounce bar of cannabis found under settee in living room (counts 6 and 7).
Details of Mitigation: See below.
Previous Convictions: See below.
Conclusions:
Count 1: 1 month imprisonment.
Count 2: 1 month imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3: 1 month imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4: 1 month imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5: 3 months imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 7: 9 months imprisonment, concurrent.
Sentences imposed in respect of second indictment to follow consecutively those imposed on the first indictment.
Sentence & Observations of Court:
(On both indictments)
Accepts that supply of cannabis in different category from usual (prosecution cannot prove otherwise). Notes remarks from Sister Jane Finley, Alcohol and Drugs Service that Durkin is motivated to remain drug free and to take naltrexone, an opiod antagonist (which blocks effects of opiates). Accepts the conclusions of Crown are correct but Court decides to take an individualised approach. Noted that Durkin had already served the equivalent of 7 months and 3 days in custody. Durkin sentenced to three years’ probation and 240 hours’ community service on each count in each indictment concurrently and ordered to complete the SMART programme. Order for the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea, youth, offences committed whilst under the age of 21. Although Durkin convicted and sentenced after his 21st birthday, there was a delay in presenting the two indictments before the Court in view of the new offences occurring in March, 1998. Spirit of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law to be applied. Suffered treble bereavement in the space of six months. Grandmother passed away, then both uncle and his girlfriend of 18 months died from drugs overdoses. Then started to abuse sleeping tablets. However, it was acknowledged that Durkin initially started experimenting with illegal drugs at age 15. The facts concerning the possession with intent to supply were unusual in that Durkin and a friend (unnamed) had agreed to each pay £400 towards the cost of the 9 ounce bar of cannabis. The friend was already a drug user no element of profit. The bar was to be split in half by Durkin and half handed to his friend.
Previous Convictions:
In 1994 before the Jersey Youth Court possession with intent to supply MDMA and MDA and possession of cannabis resin - sentenced to probation order with 60 hours’ community service. Probation order breached and sentence of three months’ youth detention substituted. One offence of dishonesty (theft, shoplifting) in 1996 where Durkin was granted conditional discharge 12 months by Ruddland (Rhyl) Magistrate’s Court.
Matthews Esq Crown Advocate
Advocate J D Martin for the Accused
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: In receiving the switch card in the name of Stephen Henry Kimsey, Durkin took careful steps to ensure that he would not be caught. The card was not used for necessaries, but to buy expensive luxury items, and although Miss Martin says that he was in a daze because of the problems that he has with drugs we have to note that in six days he had effectively stolen £815.56 worth of goods.
He has pleaded guilty, but perhaps discovery was almost inevitable from the shop-keepers who knew him, and indeed the numerous offences with which Durkin is charged show a wide range of criminality.
If a signal has to be given to shoplifters to discourage others, then credit card fraud is no more than an overt form of shoplifting. The wide range of criminality which we have spoken of involves actual shoplifting: some £290.74 goods from Voisin & Co.
Drug offences are always serious, even though they are for personal use, but in this case there are as varied as the other offences. The most serious, of course, is the possession of the nine bars of cannabis with intent to supply. Now the Crown Advocate has told us that the street value, £1,400, represents 72 deals of 1/8th of an ounce, but Miss Martin has argued - and the Crown appears to accept the submission - that it was, in fact, purchased at a discount from an unknown source, and was to be sold to a friend in part, at no profit, for the personal use of both of them, and if that is correct - and it has not been disputed by the Crown - it puts the offending into a quite different category.
There is a history of previous offending involving possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply, which led to probation - a breach of that order - and three months’ Youth Custody.
We have looked at all the cases with some care, and to the very detailed report in particular of the Alcohol and Drugs Service, and of course the helpful and indeed very detailed report of the Probation Service.
It appears that the accused is, or has been, addicted to drugs but there have been some very traumatic personal tragedies which include the suicide of his girlfriend and other family deaths, one of a close friend from a drug overdose. He is 21, so he is of a comparatively young age and he has spent the equivalent of 7 months and 3 days on remand.
We cannot regard the conclusions of the Crown as being anything other than perfectly correct, but because of the background reports that we have read and because of the matters that Miss Martin has urged upon us, we are going to take a different course.
Stand up please. We are going to place you on 3 years’ Probation; you are going to carry out 240 hours’ Community Service in the first year, and you will attend the S.M.A.R.T. programme. Now I know you have problems, but you do realise that during those 3 years’ if you breach your probation - I know this is your first visit to the Royal Court - if you breach that probation all these offences will be looked at again and you will remember what I said, that we regarded the conclusions of the Crown Advocate, who moved for a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment, as perfectly correct. It is now entirely up to you how you get on.
Authorities
Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey: p.53
A.G -v- Bree ( 15th September, 1995) Jersey Unreported
A.G -v- Flynn (2nd February, 1990) Jersey Unreported
A.G -v- Johnstone (2nd December, 1996) Jersey Unreported
A.G -v- Thomas (8th March, 1996) Jersey Unreported
A.G -v- Hamon (22nd May, 1998) Jersey Unreported [1998.104]
A.G -v- Campbell, Molloy, and Mackenzie (1995) JLR 136 CofA
A.G. -v- Godwin (4th December, 1989) Jersey Unreported.
A.G. -v- Such (21st November, 1997) Jersey Unreported. [1997.210]
A.G. -v- Roscouet (18th January, 1991) Jersey Unreported.
Mitchell (1996) 2 Cr.App.R.(S) 369.
Thomas: Current Sentencing Practice: para. c.2.d.; A5-3F&C.