Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC139

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

13^th August, 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Peter Henri Francis Botrel

 

 

1 count of:	Possessing a firearm, contrary to Article 2(1) (a) of the Firearms (Jersey) Law 2000 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Discharging a firearm in a dangerous manner, contrary to Article 44 (b) of the Firearms (Jersey) Law 2000 (Count 2).

 

 

Age:     54.

 

Plea:    Convicted by the Inferior Number (en police correctionnelle) on a Not Guilty plea.

 

Details of Offence:

The Defendant perceived himself to be the subject of threats from a man named Eidukas.  Despite reporting this to the Police, early one Saturday morning he took matters into his own hands.  He armed himself with a shotgun and drove into town to find Eidukas' parked van.  Once there he fired two rounds into the van's side window.  The shot pellets smashed the glass and some lodged themselves in the front door frame of a house opposite to where the van was parked (count 2).  Fortunately no-one was in the vicinity at the time. The Defendant was not in possession of the requisite licence to hold a firearm (Count 1).

The Defendant's car was spotted on the CCTV footage of the area, and he was subsequently arrested and questioned.  While under caution the Defendant told the Police that they would not find the weapon as it was "in deep water".  Forensic examination of his clothes and car revealed traces of firearm discharge residue.  He pleaded not guilty but was convicted following a trial.

 

Details of Mitigation:

No one injured, damage fairly minimal, no persons in the vicinity, no convictions since 1995, personality disorder, separated from wife, daughter addicted to drugs, some provocation, guilt about effect that this imprisonment will have on family.

 

Previous Convictions:

Lengthy record but no offences since 1995 and no offences of violent nature since 1980.

Possession of firearm/ammunition without a certificate in 1970.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	12 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

The unlawful possession and use of firearms always merits imprisonment even when a defendant has no record.  It was fortunate that no-one was injured.

 

 

 

C.M.M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate R. Juste for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Firearms offences almost always merit imprisonment, even where there is a guilty plea and even where the offender has no previous record. 

2.        You discharged a shotgun twice at about 8 o'clock in the morning on a Saturday in a public street in St Helier.  Fortunately no one was about at the time but the pellets went into a nearby building and if anyone had been coming through the hall of that building at the time they would have been struck.

3.        You intended to damage the van of Mr Eidukas.  Your shots were fired at that van and broke its windows.  You did this because Mr Eidukas had been threatening you and your family.

4.        In mitigation we take into account the fact that although you had a very poor record in earlier years you have in effect had no convictions since 1987, apart from one driving offence.  So you really have made great efforts to turn your life around. 

5.        Unfortunately life has been more difficult recently.  You have suffered from depression and your marriage has split up, although your wife is here in Court today supporting you, and she continues to support you.

6.        The difficulties have arisen because your daughter has a drug habit and the background to this offence is that an issue has arisen between the Eidukas family and yours as to whether your daughter induced his niece into drugs or vice versa.  The Court cannot know the truth of that but we certainly accept for the purposes of sentencing that you were threatened.  You had reported this to the police but felt that this had not achieved anything; we have seen the entries in your diary.

7.        It seems clear that eventually you snapped and took matters into your own hands.  That morning you drove out and committed the offence that we have described.

8.        The Court, unfortunately, simply cannot allow people to discharge firearms in public with the accompanying danger to the public.  It is a very serious matter and it has to be dealt with by a substantial prison sentence.  Furthermore, in this case you pleaded not guilty.  That, of course, is your right but it means that you do not get the additional mitigation for having pleaded guilty.

9.        Having taken all these matters into account we have decided that the Crown conclusions are correct and that they make adequate allowance for the mitigation which we have described.  The sentence of the Court, therefore, is 1 year's imprisonment, on count 1; 3 years' on count 2, concurrent, making a total of 3 years' imprisonment.

Authorities

A.G. - Le Flock (31^st January, 1997) Jersey Unreported; [1997/18].

A.G. - Ewens [2002]JRC94.

R. -v- Avis [1998] 2 Cr.App.R(S)178

R. -v- Campbell [1998] 1 Cr. App.R(S)264.