Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/127

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

1st June 2001

The Attorney General

-v-

Petrina Dione Romeril

Age:     31.

Plea:    Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On 12th March 2001, on being informed by the police that her partner was suspected of having images of child pornography on his computer, the defendant, who had been a victim of sexual abuse as a child, after consuming alcohol and taking valium, stabbed her partner in the back. The wound was approximately 4cm in length and 1cm in width but extended to 19cm during surgery, causing extensive bleeding which required 22 sutures and a blood transfusion.  The victim sustained no long term damage.

Details of Mitigation:

Romeril had received a very unsatisfactory upbringing and had suffered serious sexual abuse between the ages of  5-9 years.  The effect of this abuse had an ongoing impact on her life and she suffered from a history of psychiatric problems, including depression, attempted suicide and alcohol abuse.  Enjoyed open access to her children.  The shock and distress of finding out that her partner may have been involved with child pornography led to the worry that he may have interfered with her children.  Early admissions (later no comment interview were probably as a result of legal advice).  Subsequent expression of extreme remorse.  No serious premeditated threat.  Previous good character, with the submission of three reports which showed the defendant had down very well in life considering her tragic background.  Guilty plea.  The Crown moved for an individualised sentence on this occasion.

Previous Convictions:

None relevant.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.  The Court observed that, considering all the background circumstances, this was a clear case for an individualised sentence.  A one year Probation Order was imposed, together with 240 hours of community service, to be completed within the year.

P. Matthews, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate A. Messervy for the accused.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Normally an offence of this nature would attract a substantial prison sentence but we regard this as being a very exceptional case and we are not going to send you to prison.  You have experienced an appallingly difficult childhood, including several years of sexual abuse for which the perpetrator has never been punished.  It is not surprising, therefore, that you have very strong emotions on that subject.  It must, therefore, have come as a terrible shock to you when your partner was arrested on suspicion of being in possession of indecent photographs of children.  On the day of the assault, you were told by the police that investigations showed that there were grounds for concern.  It is fair to say that you were also told by the police officer, who was clearly acting responsibly and with the best of motives, that there was no evidence of any offences against your children.  Nevertheless, in the light of what you had been told, as your counsel put it, you 'flipped' and we accept that what followed was a wholly unpremeditated attack brought about by a revulsion at what you thought might have happened to your children.  Nevertheless, there was no justification for it and, as your counsel has accepted, it was a serious and unjustified act.

2.        We have had the benefit of three excellent reports which have helped us in our task considerably.  They show that, despite many difficulties and setbacks, you have shown great resilience in overcoming your difficulties and we commend you for that.  It is clear that you have a very caring side and we have read with interest and were impressed by the letter from your former husband and from your employer.

3.        We take into account that you have never done anything of this nature before; that you have pleaded guilty; and, most importantly, that you are now showing very considerable remorse for what you have done and you realise that what you did was quite wrong.

4.        In all the circumstances we agree that it is not necessary to impose a prison sentence and therefore the sentence of this Court is that you will serve a community service order of 240 hours which means that you must carry out 240 hours of unpaid work within a 12 month period.  We must say that the prison sentence we would have had in mind would have been one of 18 months.  We also impose a Probation Order of 12 months which means that you will have the help and guidance of the Probation Officer so that there is somebody to whom you can turn as well, of course, as Tina Baker and the other experts.  Should you commit any further offence or should you not carry out the community service, you will be brought back to this Court and you must realise that you would then be at risk of going to prison so we hope that you will take advantage of all these opportunities and we hope not to see you before us again.

Authorities

No Authorities