Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC168

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

24^th November 2006

The Attorney General

-v-

Janette Carole Aubert

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to:

Age:  44

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Defendant employed by Health and Social Services Department as Finance Assessment Clerk.  Her work involved administration of elderly patients' cash accounts, fees for their care, etc.  She was also responsible for maintaining the cash floats for elderly patients at The Limes, Sandybrook and Overdale Residential Homes.  Over a period of nearly ten years, she stole a total of £127,123.91.  Offending came to light after she wrote a Health and Social Services cheque made payable to herself, having forged the two necessary signatures.  Following her interview regarding the cheque, she made a full confession about the theft of cash.

Details of Mitigation:

Early guilty plea; co-operation with the police; very difficult childhood; teenage pregnancy and first marriage involving alcohol and violence; death of a twin born during second marriage followed by divorce; extensive references.  Started to steal from cash floats to better provide for her family.  Then developed gambling addiction.  At date of sentencing was being treated for breast cancer.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Total sentence: 2 years' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

Mrs S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. Fitz for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Mrs Aubert you were in a position of trust.  You were in sole charge of cash which was held on behalf of elderly and vulnerable patients in various residential homes administered by the Health and Social Services Department.  Over a period of nearly 10 years you stole cash to a total amount of some £127,000. 

2.        It may be that this started to meet living expenses, but it rapidly developed to fund your gambling addiction.  Such offences are treated seriously by this Court and invariably attract a sentence of imprisonment.   Miss Fitz has argued strongly on your behalf that we should treat this as an exceptional case and that we should show mercy, and she has been most eloquent.

3.        We do not propose to summarise all she said because she said it very powerfully, but you did plead guilty from the outset and you admitted stealing the cash at a time when that was not known about.  You have no previous convictions.  There is clearly an extremely good side to you, we have read the references.  You have had an extraordinarily difficult life for the reasons which Miss Fitz has outlined and on top of all that you now have health problems.

4.        We have read the very powerful letter from your children and your own letter.  As can be seen by the time we have spent in the retiring room we have not found this easy.  But we cannot escape from the fact that this continued for ten years and it involved a large sum of money, over £100,000.  Many people have tragic backgrounds but they do not turn to crime.

5.        We have reluctantly come to the conclusion that we cannot proceed by way of a non custodial sentence.  We do, however, ask and urge the prison authorities to do all they can to give you the assistance which has been referred to in the reports concerning your bereavement counselling and the other matters.  We see no reason why the prison authorities should not be able to do this.

6.        As to the length, normally a much longer sentence would be imposed for this sum of money over this length of time and we think the exceptional mitigation in your case has been allowed for by the Crown; so the sentence is on Count 1 of 2 years' imprisonment and on Counts 2 and 3, 18 months' imprisonment, concurrent.  On the point of your claustrophobia, which we have carefully considered, we do ask that you be taken to the prison in a car and not in a van.  I am sure arrangements can be made for that.

No Authorities