Jersey Unreported Judgments

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

27 February 1998

Before: FC Hamon Esq., Deputy Bailiff and

Jurats Vibert and Quérée

AG

-v-

Elizabeth da Conceicao Pinto Correia Magrico

7 Counts of larceny as a servant (counts 1-7, inclusive)

Age: 23

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

Over a period of 15 months the defendant stole items from every household in which she worked. She was employed as a house-keeper with one family but supplemented her income with cleaning jobs at other households. Total value of property stolen £6,367.00. All the property was "stock piled" in her accommodation. There was no evidence to suggest she attempted to sell the property, nor did she wear jewellery and clothing stolen or use silverware. Her reason for taking the property was unknown. She was initially unco-operative with the police in as much as she did not make full admission when faced with overwhelming evidence but this was explained as being extreme distress.

Details of Mitigation:

Defendant was clinically depressed at the time of the offences. She appeared extremely remorseful if not shocked at what she had done. She could offer no explanation for why she had stolen all the items. She now had employment in a supermarket. She had a very unhappy background. She had written to her employers apologising for what she had done. Had taken positive steps to address her depression.

 Previous Convictions:

None

Conclusions:

1 year imprisonment on each count, concurrent

Sentence and Observations

of the Court:

1 year probation with 180 hours community service

The Court said that the non-custodial sentence passed was not because they did not view the offence as serious but because of the personal circumstances which they found were truly exceptional allowing the Court to depart from the guidelines in Barrick..

Mrs S Sharpe, Crown Advocate

Advocate DJ Petit for the accused

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: This is a sad and, if I may say so, a strange case of systematic stealing from separate employers over a period of fifteen months. The total value of the property stolen was £6,367. We say that it is a strange case as there is nothing to suggest that she intended to sell the property and it had extraordinarily been "stock piled" in her room.

Crown Advocate Sharpe has referred us to the case of Barrick [1985] 7 Cr App. R(S) 142. In this English case which has been followed in this jurisdiction several times, the Court said:

There was clearly a great deal of trust reposed in the accused by her employers and, as we have said, the offences took place over some time. Her family history is certainly very sad and she spent several weeks on remand, apparently at her own request, before successfully applying for bail. She has greatly improved apparently in her mental health whilst on bail and is now in gainful employment.

The probation report strongly recommends Community Service, however it may be said that if we follow that path we are failing in our duty to society to mark the seriousness of this offence. But, she was clearly depressed throughout the period. Dr Faiz, in his psychiatric report, speaks of depression and, in his words, the intolerable relationship with her boyfriend which has shown up in her deviant behaviour.

After very great consideration, we feel that this is perhaps a case which is exceptional because of the personal circumstances of the accused. Therefore, we are going to take a very unusual course and sentence you to one year’s probation and 180 hours of Community Service. We do not do that because we think that what you have done is not extremely serious; but we think that the case is sufficiently exceptional to allow us to take that course.

Authorities

Barrick [1985] 7 Cr App. R(s) 142