Jersey Unreported Judgments

2000/55A

3 pages

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

31^st March, 2000

 

Before:  M.C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and

Jurats Le Ruez and Georgelin

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Alan James Ford

 

 

First Indictment

 

1 count of receiving stolen property (count 1);

1 count of conduct likely to cause breach of peace (count 2).

 

Second Indictment

 

1 count of breaking and entry and larceny (with co-accused Andrew Charles Newell, who has absconded).

 

Age:   20.

 

Plea:  Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

 

First Indictment

Count 1:   unrelated incident: receiving cosmetics worth £84.

Count 2:   noisy and offensive while being arrested on count 1 above.

 

Second Indictment:

Count 1:   smash and grab at jeweller's in the early hours of the morning.  Stole items worth £9,000 (retail), £3,000 (cost).  Arrested within minutes; property recovered.

 

Count 1 of second indictment committed while on bail for counts 1 & 2 above.

 

Details of Mitigation

 

Plea of guilty (although entered late).  Youth.

 

Previous Convictions:

 

Numerous drink-related and dishonesty convictions.

 

Conclusions:

 

First Indictment:      count 1: 3 months' Youth Detention.

                                count 2: 1 month's Youth Detention.

Second Indictment:  count 1: 12 months' Youth Detention.

                                All concurrent.

                                TOTAL:  12 months' Youth Detention.

 

Sentence and Observations of the Court:   Conclusions granted.

 

History of offending while on bail together with seriousness of the breaking and entering offence militated against non-custodial disposal.

 

 

C.E. Whelan, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S.E. Fitz for the accused.

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

 

1.      This case involved a smash and grab at a jeweller's shop in the Parade Arcade when jewellery to a retail value of some £9,200 but with a cost value of £3,000 was taken.  Fortunately it was all recovered and both Ford and his co-accused, Newell, were apprehended almost immediately by the police who heard the break-in and saw the accused run off.

 

2.      Miss Fitz has put forward a number of matters in mitigation; in particular she relies upon Ford's youth and the fact that he has pleaded guilty, although we have to say that, as this came late in the day, the credit to be given for that plea cannot be as great as it would have been had Ford admitted his involvement from the outset.

 

3.      Miss Fitz has also submitted that this offence and the offences on the first indictment were contributed to by Ford's consumption of alcohol and it is clear from the reports that even at his young age Ford has a problem with the consumption of alcohol.

 

4.      We have of course taken into account the terms of Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 but we are satisfied that the Crown is right when it says that the totality of offending in this case was so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified.

 

5.      We have considered the matter carefully but we are going to grant the Crown's conclusions and the sentence therefore will be: on the first indictment, 3 months' youth detention on count 1; 1 month's youth detention on count 2; and 12 months' youth detention on the second indictment and all to be concurrent with each other.

 

6.      Mr. Ford, the Court has to tell you that when you are released you will be under the supervision of the Probation Service and we very much hope that you will take advantage of that supervision.  You have expressed through your counsel a desire to conquer your drink problem.  When you are released under supervision the Probation Office will be there to help you with this.

Authorities

 

 

Whelan:  Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey: pp. 63-64.