Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC135

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

30^th September, 2005

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Neil Francis Dickinson

 

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

 

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 1).
1 count of:	Larceny as servant. (Count 2).
1 count of:	Buying intoxicating liquor on behalf of a person under the age of 18 years contrary to Article 13 (2A) of the Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974. (Count 3).
1 count of:	Unlawful sexual intercourse contrary to Article 4 (1) of the Loi (1985) modifiant le droit criminel. (Count 4).

 

 

Age:     19.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

Count 1.  Defendant was riding moped, uninsured, in multi-storey car park.

Count 2.  Defendant stole keys to office and safe of his employer in the market.  He attempted to have the keys copied by a locksmith but was unable to do so.  Using the stolen keys, he hid after business had closed and then opened the safe, removing £321 cash.

Counts 3 and 4.  Defendant and Miss X were neighbours and mixed with a similar group of friends.  Miss X called at his house early one evening and they decided to walk to the beach to drink alcohol and chat.  Miss X asked the Defendant to buy her half a bottle of vodka.  He did so and bought himself a bottle of Southern Comfort.  On arrival at the beach, they both sat underneath the supporting scaffolding of Emilio's café and drank the alcohol.  Two independent witnesses walking their dogs said that they had seen the couple on the beach.  The first witness had seen Miss X sitting on the defendant's lap and it appeared that the couple were becoming intimate.  The second witness later that evening saw the couple having sexual intercourse.  Being embarrassed by what he saw, he looked away and returned to his car.  Defendant was aged 18 at time of the offence and the victim was 13, although close to her 14^th birthday.  A back calculation of blood alcohol concentration in Miss X's blood sample indicated approximately 234 mg in 100 ml of blood: i.e. she was extremely drunk.  Miss X vehemently denied that she consented to the intercourse;  defendant equally denied that she had been unwilling.  Defendant knew that victim was 13.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Early guilty pleas.  Defendant was immature 19 year old identified as having serious emotional, behavioural and psychological problems.  Psychological report said he was highly vulnerable and required treatment to overcome underlying problems to reduce risk of re-offending.

 

Previous Convictions:

Five previous convictions arising from 27 offences:  20 relating to theft, 4 to fraud and 3 offences against property between 1998 and 2003.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	£400 or 1 month's youth detention, in default of payment.
Count 2:	6 months' youth detention.
Count 3:	1 month's youth detention.
Count 4:	12 months' youth detention, all concurrent.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

Mrs S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate C. Fogarty for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are before the Court for an offence of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl of 13.  You also stole £320, and committed some other less serious offences.

2.        We accept that you are very immature for your age, as set out in the Reports which we have read very carefully.  Nevertheless, you were 18 at the time and the girl was only 13.  Furthermore, you knew that she was very drunk and that she might not necessarily have consented if she had not been so drunk.  Young girls are entitled to protection from themselves.

3.        We take into account the mitigation that has been put forward on your behalf by your Advocate, Miss Fogarty.  We note your guilty plea, the fact that you are remorseful.  We have read your letter, and the references, the fact that youth detention is particularly difficult for you, as you described, and the fact that the larceny was a form of revenge rather than for gain.  Nevertheless, despite all that we are satisfied that your offending is of such seriousness that we cannot proceed by way of a non-custodial penalty.

4.        We agree that you need assistance.  We note from one of the reports that much of that assistance could be given in youth detention and we urge that that be done.  We very much hope that you will take advantage of the remaining time.

5.        Normally sentences of this nature are consecutive where there is are completely separate matters such as the larceny and unlawful sexual intercourse; but in view of your youth and in view of the mitigation that Miss Fogarty has put forward we are going to make them concurrent as recommended by the Crown. 

6.        The sentence of the Court is as follows, on Count 1 £400 fine or 1 month's youth detention, in default; Count 2, 6 months' youth detention, Count 3, 1 month's youth detention and Count 4, 12 months' youth detention, all of those including the penalty in default on the fine, to be served concurrently.  So that is 12 months' youth detention in all, and I must warn you that you may be liable to supervision when you are released.

Authorities

AG -v- Rosser [2002]JRC067.

Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2^nd Ed'n): pp. 340 - 363 and 946 - 969.

R -v- Taylor and Ors (1977) 64 CR. App. R. 182.