Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2003]JRC053

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

14^th March 2003

The Attorney General

-v-

Kenneth William Hodson

Age:     50.

Plea:    Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Hodson stabbed victim in stomach with a knife during a scuffle.  Superficial injuries.

Details of Mitigation:

The victim was the Defendant's wife's boyfriend.  The wife had invited the boyfriend to the marital home on the Defendant's 50^th birthday and the couple's wedding anniversary.  This was provocation in itself and was aggravated by the victim inciting the Defendant and telling him to "go on then" when faced with the knife.  The Defendant had no previous convictions, was assessed as being at low risk of re-offending, was remorseful and had been co-operative.  The Defendant was suffering constant pain as a result of an accident some years ago.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.  The Court agreed that the case was exceptional.

Advocate S.E. Fitz, Crown Advocate.

Advocate D. Cadin for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

BAILIFF:

1.        This defendant pleaded guilty to a grave and criminal assault by stabbing another man in the stomach during the course of a drunken squabble.  A knife was apparently kept by the defendant's bedside as a means of protection as he had been recently burgled.  Both the Crown Advocate and Defence Counsel have described the mitigation available to the defendant as exceptional. 

2.        We do not need to relate all the circumstances; suffice it to say that the defendant had resolved to try to repair his marriage, notwithstanding the psychiatric and other problems, including alcoholism, suffered by his wife.  The events took place on the night of his birthday and wedding anniversary when, contrary to the defendant's wishes, his wife had invited her boyfriend back to the matrimonial home where he was to spend the night.

3.        What happened precisely on that evening has been lost in a haze of alcohol, but we are satisfied that there was extreme provocation by the victim of the assault.  The defendant is aged 50, is suffering from a painful disability, and is otherwise a man of very good character.  We accept the submission of Defence Counsel that this offence was indeed wholly out of character.  The defendant was co-operative with the police and expressed remorse from the outset. 

4.        We have given careful consideration to the submissions made by your Counsel, as to the length of community service which we should order, but at the end of the day we have to take into account that to use a knife, even during the course of a struggle as we have described it, is completely unacceptable and we must punish you for that offence.  We are going to accept the recommendations of the Crown Advocate that a custodial sentence should not be imposed; and we are going to impose a sentence of community service, but we are going to grant the conclusions and you will perform 180 hours' of community service to the satisfaction of the Community Service organiser.  I have to say that if the Court had not imposed this non-custodial sentence, it would have imposed a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment; and you will obviously be at risk of that if you do not complete the community service satisfactorily

No Authorities