Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/234

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

23^rd November 2001

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Brian Jamie Stopher

(aka Botting)

 

 

1 count of:	Larceny by finding (count 1);
1 count of:	Driving without a licence, contrary to Article 3(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956 (count 2);
1 count of:	Using a motor vehicle uninsured, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance) (Jersey) Law, 1948 (count 3);
1 count of:	Dangerous driving, contrary to Article 14(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956 (count 4);
1 count of:	Receiving stolen goods (count 5).

 

Breach of a 1 year probation order, made by the Royal Court on 22^nd November, 2000 (see Jersey Unreported Judgment of that date; [2000/231]) following guilty pleas to:

 

First Indictment

 

1 count of:	Driving a motor vehicle without a licence, contrary to Article 31 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956 as amended (count 1);
1 count of:	Using a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance) (Jersey) Law, 1948 (count 2); and
4 counts of:	Larceny (counts 3, 4, 6, 7).

 

Second Indictment (with co-accused, Jason Martin Kelly)

 

1 count of:

Being carried in a motor vehicle without the owner's consent or other legal authority, contrary to Article 28(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956 (count 2).

[On the 13^th October, the accused pleaded not guilty to count 5 of the First Indictment, and to count 1 of the Second Indictment, which pleas were accepted by the Crown].

 

Age:     23.       

 

Plea:    Guilty; breach of Probation Order admitted.

 

Details of Offence:

Count 1: found wearing new jeans still bearing "size label" over older pair.  The defendant said he had found them behind a bin in town.

Counts 2 and 3: a member of the public had complained that his vehicle had been damaged by a blue 'Peugeot'.  Police stopped the vehicle at Mont Millais and attempted to get the defendant to pull over, but he drove away without insurance or a driving licence.

Count 4: A couple of days later there was second attempt to stop the defendant whilst driving his vehicle, but he drove away at a speed in excess of 60 mph entering the car park at Green Island in excess of 40 mph.

Count 5: The defendant was found in possession of a stolen mobile phone and claimed that he had swapped it with an unknown male.

The defendant was committed to the Royal Court for being in breach of the Royal Court probation order.

 

Details of Mitigation:

There were tragic family circumstances in this case.  The defendant is a self-confessed heroin addict.

 

Previous Convictions:

There had been nine previous Court appearances involving around 50 offences mainly relating to motoring, drugs and larceny.  In particular five previous offences for driving without a licence or insurance.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	3 weeks' imprisonment;
Count 2:	£500 fine or 3 months' imprisonment in default of payment;
Count 3:	6 months' imprisonment;
Count 4:	£500 fine or 3 months' imprisonment in default of payment; 6 months' disqualification from driving;
Count 5:	3 weeks' imprisonment; all concurrent.

 

Breach of Probation Order: to be discharged.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

Mrs. S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate A.J.D. Winchester for the accused.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        Stopher, at the age of 23, already has a bad record.  He is at present unemployed and is a heroin addict.  The tragedy of this case is that everyone has bent over backwards to help him and he is not prepared - or perhaps because of his addiction - is not able to help himself.

2.        All the charges brought before us today are within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate's Court, but, because of the breach of probation, we are to deal with the case.  We need to remind ourselves that on 22^nd November, 2000, this Court said:

"Stopher you have behaved very foolishly in many of the offences which you have committed, but the Court has taken account of the background reports and of the difficulties which you have been facing in recent months.  We also take account of the fact that you have in fact already served some 7 or 8 weeks in prison on remand for these offences, and we think that you have been punished enough for the offences which you have committed."

3.        Stopher was placed on probation for twelve months.  On 13^th December, the Magistrate ordered Stopher to perform 40 hours' community service for receiving stolen goods.  That offence was committed prior to the Royal Court hearing.

4.        On 20^th March, Stopher took a bicycle and rode away on it; that was a minor offence but serious because he was on probation.  No action was taken.

5.        On 15^th June, Stopher failed to attend the SMART programme and, again, was in breach of probation.

6.        Then the present charges arose and took their course through the Magistrate's Court.  Because of the decision made and the charges brought, Stopher spent sometime in custody and he has served the equivalent of four months and seven days on remand for these offences.

7.        Stopher has failed to complete the SMART course and he still has 30 hours outstanding on his community service hours.  He has completed ten hours.  We have to regard the offences in the light of his chaotic lifestyle and his drug abuse.  When he drove dangerously on 15^th July, he had apparently taken a prescribed week's supply of Valium at one go.

8.        We have read the reports very carefully and the letter which was handed to us as we retired which is a very sad one from Stopher's mother.  As Mr. Winchester has so clearly said, his background is a truly tragic one but his offending behaviour is now showing an unacceptable pattern.

9.        Stopher, stand up, please.  The only person who can help you is yourself but you have got to make a choice.  We are, not surprisingly, going to follow the Crown's conclusions.  Mrs. Sharpe has pointed out that her conclusion on count 2 is not correct and therefore I must formally sentence you as follows.  On count 1, you are sentenced to 3 weeks' imprisonment; on count 2, you are fined £500, or 3 months' imprisonment in default of payment; on count 3, you are sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment; on count 4, you are fined £500, or 3 months' imprisonment in default of payment, and 6 months' disqualification from driving; on count 5, you are sentenced to 3 weeks' imprisonment.  We are going to discharge all the outstanding orders and we make all the sentences concurrent which means that you will be released from prison by 29^th December at the latest.  You will have a start which will be a clean sheet, and while you are in custody we want to make certain that you get all the help which you so desperately need and I am sure that that help will be made available to you whilst you are in custody.

 

Authorities

AG-v-Stopher & Anor (22^nd November, 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/231].