Jersey Unreported Judgments

2001/41

3 pages

 

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

16^th February, 2001

 

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

                                                     Jurats Le Ruez and Quérée

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Trevor Edward Scott

 

 

1 count of: grave and criminal assault.

 

Age:    26.

 

Plea:   Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

 

The first incident:  Scott pushed the victim (his common law wife) backwards over a chair causing her to fall against a wall and then to the floor.  As she tried to get up Scott pushed her down and repeatedly banged her head against the carpeted floor calling her a "bitch" and a "whore".  The victim appeared to become unconscious and Scott slapped her across the face in order to revive her.  This incident was witnessed by the parties' nine year old child.  Scott then called for an ambulance.  On the arrival of the police Scott was very emotional and appeared generally concerned about the victim.  The victim was taken to hospital where she was treated and returned home approximately an hour later where she found Scott asleep on the sofa.

 

The second incident:  The victim woke up the accused in order to discuss matters.  This developed into a further argument and Scott pushed her back.  She fell to the floor, Scott slapped her across the face, grabbed her by the hair and dragged her from the lounge into the bedroom and then threw her onto the bed.  The victim bit Scott's neck and kicked him between the legs causing the accused to become even angrier.  Scott held her down with his hand (or hands) around her throat.  The victim pleaded with him to stop and after some time released his grip.  When the police doctor examined the victim he concluded that she had been kicked many times in the body and an attempt had been made to throttle her.

 

The incidents arose as the result of a domestic argument (however in AG -v- Le Feuvre the Court makes no distinction between domestic violence and street violence).  For the purposes of sentencing the Crown accepted that the victim may have struck the first blow in relation to the second incident and that there may have been an element of verbal abuse or provocation on the part of the victim.  No weapon was used and the injuries which were caused by the accused kicking the victim were on the victim's back, buttock and thighs; no kicks being directed to the victim's head.  No serious harm was caused but the victim feared for her life; there were no broken bones and no lasting physical injuries.  However, Scott was physically much stronger then the victim and the first incident had been witnessed by a nine year old child.

 

Details of Mitigation:

 

Although the accused initially denied the assaults during the question and answer interview, a guilty plea was entered on 6^th October, 2000, which post-dates the time when the victim made a statement to the police saying that she wished to withdraw her complaint.  Scott had no previous convictions for violence and there was no history of domestic abuse; the parties were now reconciled; this was a one-off incident; the accused had shown genuine remorse, guilt and shame; Scott has made a concerted effort to reform his life, having managed to wean himself off heroin and obtained gainful employment.  The Crown moved for an individualised sentence and Scott was placed on 1 year's probation with 240 hours' community service.

 

Previous Convictions:   None relevant.

 

Conclusions:    1 year Probation Order with 240 hours' community service.

 

Sentence & Observations of the Court:    Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

P. Matthews, Esq., Crown Advocate;

Advocate R. Tremoceiro for the accused.

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

 

1.            Those who commit grave and criminal assaults on their partners can usually expect to go to prison.  However, on this occasion the Crown has moved for a non-custodial sentence and has referred in particular to a number of matters.

 

2.            The first is that it is agreed that this is out of character; there has been no history of violence in this relationship and indeed the defendant has no previous convictions for violence.  Secondly, although this must have been a terrifying incident for the defendant's wife, nevertheless there have been no serious injuries.  The defendant has pleaded guilty and we accept that he is extremely remorseful for what has happened.  We also give credit for the fact that the defendant has weaned himself off his heroin habit, has found settled employment; and we have taken full note of the references which have been supplied.  We are pleased to note that the employment has remained open.

 

3.            Most importantly, we have had regard to the very strong support you have received from your wife.  She has written a very powerful letter to the Court explaining the effect on her and on your son and in particular the fact that your son missed you so much when you were on remand that his performance at school was affected but that when you returned to the family he returned to his normal self.

 

4.            We hope, Mr. Scott, that you have learned your lesson and that you will put all this behind you and will not re-offend because if you do re-offend you will go to prison.

 

5.            The sentence of the Court is that you will be placed on an unsupervised probation order for 12 months on condition that you carry out 240 hours of community service as a punishment.  We hope not to see you before the Court again.

Authorities

 

 

A.G. -v- Le Feuvre (24^th April, 1996) Jersey Unreported.