Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC127

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

16^th September 2005

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Karl McShane

 

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, on guilty pleas to:

 

1 count of:	Dangerous driving contrary to Article 22 (1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 1).
1 count of:	Driving whilst under the influence of drink or drugs, contrary to Article 27 (1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 2).
1 count of:	Failing to stop and report an accident contrary to Article 52 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (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, 1948. (Count 4).
1 count of:	Driving without a licence contrary to Article 4 (1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 5).
1 count of:	Being drunk and disorderly on licensed premises contrary to Article 82 of the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974. (Count 6).

 

 

Age:     37.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

McShane and his girlfriend spent the afternoon drinking before ending up at Le Hocq Inn.  By this time he had had 5 vodkas and 3 - 4 shots of Baileys and Sambuca.  On arrival at Le Hocq Inn, McShane had a further 4 double vodkas in quick succession.  He was arguing with his girlfriend and becoming increasingly aggressive.  He invited two male patrons to fight outside (Count 6).

He then left to drive home.  At this time he had a breath/alcohol reading of approximately 110 ugs.  On the way home, whilst he was still arguing with his girlfriend, he drove into a 52 year old female pedestrian, crushing her against a wall.  At the time, his large Jeep was running on oversize tyres which exacerbated the victim's injuries.  The victim suffered a laceration to the head, a very badly broken leg and lost half a toe.  She was very lucky not to have been killed (Counts 1 and 2).

After the collision, McShane refused to stop and drove home (Count 3).  He told his flatmates not to call the Police, and he hid his car.  At the time of the incident he had been driving without insurance and without a valid driving licence (Counts 4 and 5).

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, remorse, genuinely unaware of lack of insurance.

 

Previous Convictions:

Previous offence of failing to supply a sample, together with offences of violence.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	15 months' imprisonment, plus 5 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 2:	4 months' imprisonment plus 5 years' disqualification from driving, concurrent.
Count 3:	4 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	9 months' imprisonment plus 5 years' disqualification from driving, concurrent.
Count 5:	£400.00 fine or 1 month's imprisonment in default, concurrent.
Count 6:	1 month's imprisonment, consecutive.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:	15 months' imprisonment, plus 5 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 2:	4 months' imprisonment plus 5 years' disqualification from driving, concurrent.
Count 3:	4 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	3 months' imprisonment plus 5 years' disqualification from driving, concurrent.
Count 5:	£100.00 fine or 1 month's imprisonment in default, concurrent.
Count 6:	1 month's imprisonment, consecutive.

 

Total 16 months' imprisonment and 5 years disqualification with a £100 fine.

 

This was a serious case of dangerous driving with very high alcohol levels.  Court granted Crown's conclusions but with minor revisions to take into account that Defendant genuinely believed he was insured.

 

 

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

Advocate S Pearmain for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        This is a serious case of dangerous driving, fuelled by a very high intake of alcohol. In an angry mood, and arguing with your girlfriend, you ploughed into the victim who was walking on your side of the road.  As we have heard she suffered a broken leg and lost part of a toe.  She is making a recovery but will be left with scarring because of the skin grafts.  We have read her statements and she was fortunate not to have been more seriously injured.

2.        You were clearly aware of the accident, as you admitted to your friend shortly afterwards, but you drove on and you told your friends not to tell the police and indeed you sought to hide your car behind the house.

3.        The alcohol levels suggest that at the time you had 110 micro grams of alcohol in your breath, which is a high level. 

4.        As to the offence of driving without insurance we accept what your counsel says on your behalf, that you thought you were insured, and we will be reducing the conclusions to reflect that. 

5.        Also because of the application made earlier concerning the background report, we wish to make it absolutely clear that we are sentencing purely on the basis of the Crown's version of events which has been accepted by you, and of course taking account of everything Mrs Pearmain has said in mitigation. 

6.        In that respect you have pleaded guilty and that is to your credit.  We accept that you are remorseful.  We have seen your letter, and indeed Mr Gafoor's report makes it clear that he thought you were remorseful.  We accept that you have no previous convictions for dangerous driving although you do have a number of convictions for offences of violence and you failed to provide a breath test on one previous occasion.

7.        We accept that you have shown responsibility to your family in the sense that you have supported them.  You have a good work record, and we have read the reference, and you went back to the UK and returned here having been released on bail. 

8.        We have taken account of the matters put forward by Mrs Pearmain, but she and you have very realistically accepted that it is difficult to quarrel with the Crown's conclusions in this case, having regard to the seriousness of the matter and the other cases to which we have been referred; particularly for example, that of R -v- Friend (1998) 1 Cr. App. R (S) 163.  We agree the conclusions are correct, although we are going to make some minor variations. 

9.        The sentences are as follows: Count 1, 15 months' imprisonment, with 5 years' disqualification from driving; Count 2, 4 months' imprisonment with 5 years' disqualification; Count 3, 4 months' imprisonment; Count 4, which is the driving without insurance, we are reducing that to 3 months' imprisonment to reflect the fact that you thought you were insured, and we similarly disqualify you from driving; Count 5, driving without a licence we will find you £100 or 1 week's imprisonment, in default, concurrent; and on Court 6, 1 month's imprisonment, that is the drunk and disorderly, but that is to be consecutive.  The total sentence is therefore 16 months' imprisonment, £100 fine, or 1 week's imprisonment in default concurrent, and a total of 5 years disqualification.

Authorities

A.G. -v- Hamon (1995) JRC103A.

A.G. -v- Marett & Riddell [2004]JRC166.

R -v- Friend (1998) 1 Cr. App. R (S) 163.

R -v- King (2000) 1 Cr. App R (S) 105.