Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC080

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

10^th June 2005

The Attorney General

-v-

Ryan Stephen Murphy

Inferior Number sentencing on guilty pleas to the following:

Age:     19.

Details of Offence:

Affray: Having been drinking all night was one of several others involved in dragging a semi-comatose victim, who was under the influences of drink and drugs, across a pub car park, down some steps and then taped him to a traffic light post.  Victim had his trousers around his ankles.

Assault:  With another man approached victim at night in St Helier, having glared at whim whilst in a nightclub.  Punched and kneed victim causing cut above left eye requiring 3 stitches.  Unprovoked attack two men against one.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, youth.

Previous Convictions:

Drunk and disorderly;

Malicious damage;

Aiding and Abetting a kidnap.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Exclusion Order:  6 months from date of release from all categories except 6^th Category.

R. Morris, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. Baker for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        We turn immediately to the offence of affray which as we have said before in A.G. -v- Shewan [1999]JRC22 is by its very nature a particularly grave matter.  Coupled with that, of course, is the assault just before Christmas of last year in Conway Street which was apparently unprovoked. In both those cases alcohol played a part.

2.        Of course the offence of affray covers a very wide variety of situations and in his work Principles of Sentencing Professor Thomas talks of the level of violence used, the scale of the affray and the extent to which it was premeditated or spontaneous. 

3.        Now in both these cases, the assault and the affray, your behaviour was cowardly and unpleasant.  The alarming thing about the detailed reports that we have read is the passage which says that you show alarming, limited victim empathy and no remorse.  You have youth on your side and you have pleaded guilty at an early stage.  We note that you have already served 4 months in youth custody. 

4.        However, I am bound to explain to you that under Article 4 (2) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994 the offence, or the totality of the offending is so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified.  The question that we have had to face is how long you should serve for these very serious offences.

5.        We are going to sentence you to 3 months on Count 1, and 6 months on Count 2, consecutive; that is 9 months in total, and you have already served 17 weeks and 2 days which is approximately equivalent to 6 months.  I hope you use the remaining opportunity to try to turn your life around, but I have to tell you that there will be an exclusion order and this is in addition to your sentence.  It does not apply to Category 6 licenses, which are off-licenses, but it applies to all other Categories of licensed premises and that will come into effect for 6 months from the date of your release.  I have to tell you that you may be subject to a period of supervision once you have come out youth custody.

Authorities

A.G. -v- Shewan [1999]JRC22.

Thomas: Principles of Sentencing, pp 110-112.

Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994