Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/228

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

14^th November 2001

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Liam Mortimer Cronin

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 26th September, 2001, following a change of plea to guilty to:

 

1 count of:	grave and criminal assault.
Admitted breach of a 1 year Probation Order made on 30th January, 2001, in the Magistrate's Court on guilty pleas to 2 counts of breaking and entering and committing a crime; 1 count of driving after consuming alcohol in excess of limit and two minor motoring offences

 

 

Age:     32

 

Plea:    Guilty

 

Details of Offence:

Defendant met his female victim at lunchtime in the Fiddler's Arms Bar in Dicq Road.  Prior to the meeting the Defendant and victim were strangers.  At the end of the afternoon victim invited Defendant back to her flat for a drink.  After the Defendant and the victim had spend several hours talking, drinking and watching T.V, for reasons which the victim could not explain Defendant became aggressive.  He lunged at victim slamming her head against the wall and putting his hand over her mouth and nose preventing her from breathing.  The victim struggled with the Defendant for 10-15 minutes.  She stated that she thought the Defendant was 'going to kill her'.  During the attack the victim was so scared that her bowels opened involuntarily and she become incontinent of urine.  Victim eventually managed to drag herself away from Defendant and whilst she was curled up on the floor Defendant left.  Victim suffered a total of 36 separate injuries - none severe.  Defendant arrested 2 days later when found sleeping rough.  Denied offence and maintained not guilty plea until day before Defendant due to stand trial before Criminal Assizes.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Accused had no previous convictions for violence.  Offence out of character.  Father died when he was 16 - mother wheelchair bound - he took on responsibility of looking after family.  He had good employment - has a 6 year old son from a previous relationship and keeps in touch with him and his mother - intended to return to Eire after sentence - no weapon used - assault lasted 10-15 minutes unlike in the case of Powell (1 -  1½ ) hours injuries to victim much less severe.  Only bruising - agrees sentencing band set out in Mallet correct, but submits Powell a useful case as also involved an assault upon a female without the use of a weapon.  In Powell the victim was known to the Defendant.  In present case victim a stranger.  Starting point should be 4 years with mitigation sentence should be reduced to 3 years.

 

Previous Convictions:

Various motoring and dishonesty offences but no previous violence.

N.B.  Defendant in breach of Probation Order of 12 months imposed by Magistrate's Court on 30^th January, 2001 when Defendant also ordered to perform 100 hours Community Service.  Breach remanded by Magistrate for consideration by Royal Court on 13^th November, 2001.  Defendant had performed 40 hours of Community Service at time of present offence.

 

Conclusions:

4 years' imprisonment; Probation Order to be discharged.  (Starting point:  5 years).

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

3½ years' imprisonment; Probation Order to be discharged. (Appropriate starting point: 4 years).

 

 

 

D.E. Le Cornu, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate R. Juste for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        Cronin has pleaded guilty at the eleventh hour to a charge of grave and criminal assault.  The accused had been drinking.  According to the special substance misuse report, his average weekly consumption is some 50 pints of beer.  He considers his drinking to be within acceptable limits.

2.        He met the complainant at the 'Fiddler's Arms', which is part of the Hotel de Normandie, less than five minutes walk from the complainant's flat.  They struck up a conversation.  She invited him back to her flat.  There is no question of this being a sexual invitation.  When they arrived at the flat, the accused had purchased a bottle of wine.

3.        The complainant had consumed four to five pints of lager.  The accused that day had drunk at least ten pints of lager and possibly more.  The wine was drunk; conversation of a general nature took place and then, after some two hours, for no apparent reason, Cronin became aggressive.  He slammed the complainant's head against the headboard of the bed, put his hand over her mouth and shouted "you women always think you can get away with everything but you can't".  The  assault continued.  She told the police that she thought the defendant was going to kill her.  She was terrified; she defecated and urinated in her terror.  Suddenly the defendant left the flat.  The complainant cleaned herself up, changed and went to the 'Fiddler's Arms' where a barman noticed her injuries and distress and called the police.  The assault had lasted, perhaps, ten to fifteen minutes.

4.        The defendant was found two days later at 6 o'clock in the morning sleeping rough in the Grands Vaux area.  He gave a false name and said that he had just arrived in Jersey without any luggage.  Although his black jacket had been left in the flat, he continued his denials, but eventually told the police that when he had left the flat at about 8.30 pm on the evening of the assault, leaving his jacket behind, the complainant was not distressed and had not been assaulted.

5.        After the assault, to which he pleaded guilty on the eve of his assize trial on 26th September, Cronin had checked in at the Rex Hotel, but having discovered that the police were looking for him, had checked out and, as we have said, was found sleeping rough.

6.        A physical inspection of the complainant made on 16th May by Dr. Mandy Johnson, who is a police surgeon, shows in her detailed report that the complainant suffered some 36 injuries, mainly bruising, to her body.  A bruise to her left ear was consistent with her having been slapped and bruising and redness to her throat was consistent with being held in an armlock.  Although some of  the bruising might have been sustained when she fell to the floor, her injuries completely supported her story of a sustained assault.  The report does not, of course, deal with the terror that this young girl must have felt.

7.        Miss Juste has agreed that the case of Mallet-v-AG (14th July, 2000) Jersey Unreported CofA should be the guiding factor for this Court.  We have also carefully considered, and in detail, the case of Powell-v-AG (19th July, 2000) Jersey Unreported CofA.  In Mallet the Court of Appeal said at p.6 para. 24:

"As it will be clear from our earlier remarks, whilst it is not appropriate to advocate formally a layered tariff with the offence of grave and criminal assault it is quite clear from the English authorities that sentences for offences against a person are graded according to the particular offence in respect of which the sentence is being imposed.  We consider it will be of assistance to Jersey Courts if in assessing the seriousness of the offence they follow in general terms the English framework."

8.        The facts of Mallet involved an attack resulting from a homosexual advance and there was an element of provocation.  In the Powell case the facts, again, were quite different, the accused had been in a live-in relationship with the complainant, but of course the physical assault in that case was far more severe.  After careful consideration we feel that this case falls within the three to five year bracket mentioned in Mallet.

9.        Miss Juste has, in mitigation, stated that there are no previous offences for violence and this offence, therefore, was out of character.  The accident involving Cronin's parents where his father died and his mother was seriously injured and his actions immediately thereafter were creditable.  He was on probation at the time of the assault and we have heard of the facts concerning the offences that led to his being placed on probation.  His guilty plea, of course, is important because it saved the complainant the ordeal of a full trial.

10.      We find that, if we start at four years, we can, taking all the available mitigation into account, sentence the accused to 3½ years and we intend so to do.

11.      Stand up, please.  Cronin, we are sentencing you to 3½ years' imprisonment and we discharge the Probation Order and the other orders made on 30^th January, 2001.

 

 

Authorities

Mallet-v-AG (14^th July, 2000) Jersey Unreported CofA; [2000/134].

Powell-v-AG (19^th July, 2000) Jersey Unreported CofA; [2000/139].

Powell-v-AG (27^th October, 2000) CofA; [2000/209].