Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC117

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

24^th August 2006

The Attorney General

-v-

Clark Taljaard

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court after conviction at Assize trial on 7^th July, 2006 on a charge of:

Age:  31

Plea: Not Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Taljaard met his victim after having spent an evening of heavy drinking in several town nightclubs.

He talked to her outside the staff accommodation of the Metropole Hotel in Roseville Street, where she was working.

The victim had told the jury that Taljaard undid her trousers and took them down to her knees.  He then undid his trousers before penetrating her with his penis.  As Taljaard undid her trousers she was trying to stop him from doing so.  She recalled that he put his penis halfway into her vagina.  When she told him to stop Taljaard put one of his hands on the victim's mouth.  She removed it with her hand.  She recalled Taljaard saying "it'll be alright".  Taljaard then withdrew and made off towards Havre des Pas.

On the day after the offence, Taljaard attempted to arrange travel out of the Island, falsely claiming that his father was seriously ill.  The Crown position was that this was indicative of his guilt.

Details of Mitigation:

Taljaard cited his alcoholism as being a major factor in the offence; claiming that at the material time he was of level 8 on a scale of intoxication, where 10 is unconscious.

He also relied on relevant passages in Millberry that the Court should consider the unusual circumstances of the offence; namely that it had occurred after Taljaard and the victim has been sitting and speaking, that penetration occurred only briefly and it was not full penetration.

Previous Convictions:

Taljaard has minor previous convictions recorded against him; one shoplifting offence for which the sentence was suspended, one offence of breach of the peace for which he received a £350 fine and one offence of failing to provide a specimen, for which he received 30 days imprisonment.  All offences took place in the Isle of Man.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court identified that the guidelines in Billam be followed and that, in such cases where there are 'unusual circumstances', the Court should step back and consider the events as a whole.

In Taljaard's case, it was not considered that his intoxication could be in any way mitigating and the guideline sentence be followed.

The Court found that the application for deportation was not opposed and that Taljaard, having no links to the Island, be deported on completion of his sentence.

S. M. Baker, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. Fitz for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE Commissioner:

1.        Clark Taljaard you are now aged 31; you have previous convictions but none for sexual or violent offences.  You have been convicted, by a majority of the trial Jury, of rape.  The victim was a 19 year old woman who was, until that evening, unknown to you.  Both of you had had a good deal to drink.  You a prodigious amount, equal to about a bottle of brandy. 

2.        The offence took place in the early hours of the 17^th of October last year, on the steps outside her flat in St Helier.  The Jury clearly disbelieved and rejected your account that the girl consented to what took place, or that you believed that she consented, or that all you did was to finger her. 

3.        Therefore despite your denials at trial and since trial, this Court has to sentence you for the serious offence of rape.  This is generally regarded as the most grave of all the sexual offences.  It involves a severe degree of emotional and psychological trauma and represents a violation of a woman's integrity.  It carries with it, in many cases, the fear of infection or pregnancy, though there is no suggestion of that in the present case. 

4.        The offence inevitably attracts a custodial sentence.  In England, as in Jersey, the starting point for a single rape in a contested case is 5 years imprisonment.  Nevertheless there are variable factors to be considered and the Court has stood back to consider whether the factors urged upon us so eloquently by your Advocate, Miss Fitz, are sufficient to indicate that a reduction from the guidelines sentence should be made.  By a majority the Court has agreed that there is no such reduction appropriate in the present case, and the majority decision of the Court therefore is that the appropriate sentence is one of 5 years imprisonment and that is the sentence which the Court imposes.

5.        So far as the question of deportation is concerned, that application is not opposed, you have been convicted of a very serious offence, you have no particular links now with the United Kingdom and in the view of the Court your continued presence is to the country's detriment.  Accordingly we recommend that at the expiry of your sentence you be deported to South Africa.

No Authorities