Jersey Unreported Judgments

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

29 January 1999

Before: FC Hamon Esq, Deputy Bailiff and Jurats Myles and Quérée

AG

-v-

Michael Alan Stanley Holmes

1 count of assault (count 1)

1 count of grave and criminal assault (count 2)

Plea: Guilty

Age: 56

Details of Offence:

The accused walked past a car which a husband and wife were trying to start without success. The noise irritated him. He returned to the car as the couple got out with a view to push starting it. With very little warning he assaulted the husband with two open handed blows to the face, and when the wife remonstrated, he committed a grave and criminal assault on her by knocking her to the ground with another open handed blow, and then kicking her once in the face above the eye-brow causing a wound which required seven sutures. Assault took place in broad daylight in the presence of children.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, although there were a number of independent witnesses thus reducing its significance. Suggestion in the psychological and psychiatric reports that the accuseds thinking process had been damaged by excessive intake of alcohol over many years. Accused said to be startled by noises, and hence committed the assault.

Previous Convictions:

Binding over order in the Magistrates Court in 1995 for conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace.

Conclusions:

count 1: 1 month imprisonment

count 2:.2 years imprisonment, concurrent

Sentence and Observations

of the Court:

count 1: 1 month imprisonment

count 2: 18 months imprisonment, concurrent

This was not a Norris type of case. There was a serious assault and the background reports indicated a serious medical condition. The Court should have power to remit the defendant to a secure unit, but does not have that power. Prison might produce a result.

WJ Bailhache Esq., Crown Advocate

Advocate DJ Petit for the accused

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: About a quarter past five on the 31 July, that is in broad daylight, a Portuguese couple, a husband and wife were trying to start their car. There was some noisy revving of the vehicle.

Holmes was walking down Raleigh Avenue to buy some cigarettes at the corner shop. He turned, made a racist remark and punched Mr Nobrega. He may have received a punch back, if so, that is understandable.

Then came the grave and criminal assault, Mrs Nobrega came to remonstrate. She was slapped with considerable force across the face and fell to the floor. She was then kicked in the face. Holmes, perhaps fortunately, was wearing sandals but it may be that it was those sandals that caused the injury to her face. There were many witnesses, including a 12 year old girl, and they gave further evidence of irrational behaviour by Holmes.

Holmes has no record to speak of, although on the 21 November 1995, he was convicted before the Magistrates Court of conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace and bound over for three years. That was an argument with neighbours, and he felt victimised as a result of the Courts decision.

The background reports that we have read - and I am sure Mr Petit agrees with us - makes for disturbing reading. Holmes clearly has a serious alcohol problem but was not under the influence at the time. At 56, Holmes mind has clearly been affected by alcohol.

We have had regard to the background report which says this, in part:

Mr Henderson, the psychologist, considers the defendant to be at serious risk of committing suicide due to his fluctuating mood swings. As I say, Mr Petit clearly shares our concerns. His client will not accept probation or a community service order, indeed his General Practitioner considers him to be physically incapable of carrying out Community Service.

In our view, this Court should have the power to remit this man on a Hospital Order to St Saviours Hospital where he could be kept in a secure unit, we do not unfortunately have that power. Against that we have a duty to protect perfectly innocent members of the public whatever their race or creed from vicious attacks of this nature. When we retired, we spoke with the Prison Authorities and it may be that they, with the help of the Psychiatric Services available at the Prison might be able to produce a result which is not yet in this Court’s power.

Crown Advocate Bailhache has taken the Court of Appeal guidelines in Norris (28 September 1992) Jersey Unreported CofA, which set that the starting point for an offence of this nature at from 3 to 5 years. He has taken 3 years and allowed a full one third for the guilty plea, but Holmes’ age and record might however allow us to deduct more from that starting point, but we have to say that this is not a Norris type of case, although Mr and Mrs Nobrega might not agree. It was certainly a shameful and deplorable incident which must, in our view, be met with a custodial sentence, but we are going to allow for the relatively clean record, his age, and the very disturbing background report.

Holmes, we sentence you to 1 month imprisonment on count 1, and to 18 months imprisonment concurrent on count 2, and in doing so we will ask the Prison Authorities to note carefully our remarks on the psychiatric problems that you face.

Authorities

AG-v-Le Main (2 October 1996) Jersey Unreported

Norris-v-AG (28 September 1992) Jersey Unreported CofA