Jersey Unreported Judgments

2001/79

3 pages

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

30 March, 2001.

Before:    Sir Philip Bailhache, Bailiff,

                 and Jurats de Veulle and Allo.

The Attorney General

-v-

Jason Cyril Prior

1 count of:   grave and criminal assault (count 1);

1 count of:   taking and driving away a motor vehicle without the owner's consent, contrary to Article 28(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956, as amended, (count 2);

1 count of:   driving without a licence, contrary to Article 3 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956, as amended (count 3);

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, 1956, as amended.

On 15^th October, 1999, the accused pleaded not guilty to count 1, and guilty to counts 2-4 of the indictment.

Application for release on bail pending trial before the Inferior

Number of the Royal Court, en police correctionnelle, on count 1,

fixed for 6^th June, 2001.

The Solicitor General;

Advocate C. M. Fogarty for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.    This is an application for bail by Jason Cyril Prior pending his trial in June, 2001.

2.    The strongest points put forward by Miss Fogarty on the applicant's behalf is that Prior has been in custody on remand awaiting trial for a very long time.   He has, indeed, been in custody since 6^th April, 1999, and will, by the time he stands his trial, have served the equivalent, taking account of the usual entitlement to remission for good conduct, of some three years' imprisonment.   This is unusual but on the other hand this is, so far as this jurisdiction is concerned, an unprecedented case. Prior stands accused of a very serious offence of grave and criminal assault by deliberately driving a van at another man thereby causing grievous injury.  

3.    Prior has long-standing psychiatric problems and a history of polysubstance abuse.  At the time of his admission to prison in April, 1999, he was psychotic and was hearing voices telling him to harm himself and others.   It is true that in the controlled   conditions of the prison his mental state has improved.   Doctor Faiz's report of 7^th March, 2001, describes the medication which the applicant is taking and expresses the view that there is no evidence of psychotic symptoms at the moment.  It is necessary, however, to recall a passage from a report of Dr. John Sharkey, a distinguished consultant psychiatrist, where he stated that in the week prior to the alleged offence the applicant told him that he had stopped taking his prescribed medication on the grounds that he thought he was cured.   Furthermore, the report of Dr. Mark Cox, a consultant psychiatrist, dated 9^th March 2001 expresses the opinion that it would not be appropriate for Prior to be released on bail into the community at this stage.

4.    Given the risk of further offences being committed and all the surrounding circumstances of the case, we do not think that it is in the interests either of Prior or of the community to grant the application and that it would not be safe to grant bail today.   The application is accordingly refused.

Authorities.

AG-v-Prior (9^th February, 2001) Jersey Unreported.

AG-v-Botting & Kelly (22^nd November, 2000) Jersey Unreported.

Criminal Justice (Insane Persons)(Jersey) Law, 1964: Article 2.