Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC098

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

10^th May 2007

The Attorney General

-v-

Joshua Mark Dewhurst

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Age:  21.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Count 1: In the early hours of 20^th September, 2006, Police Officers were dealing with a public order offence unrelated to the Defendant at the Weighbridge.  The Defendant attempted to interfere with the arresting Police Officers.  He was heavily intoxicated, verbally abusive and shouting obscenities at the Officers.  He was warned on several occasions about his behaviour and language but took no notice.  He was therefore arrested and charged.

Count 2: In the early hours of 13^th November, 2006, the Defendant, who was heavily intoxicated, attempted to set fire to a pile of cardboard pizza boxes which he found outside a take-away restaurant in Stopford Road.  When the boxes did not catch alight because of the prevailing wind, the Defendant crossed the road and made further attempts to light the boxes in the shelter of the fire door from the Royal Hotel.  This time he was successful.  A significant fire developed, causing extensive damage to the hotel which was occupied at the time by forty-eight residents who had to be evacuated.  By good fortune, none of the residents were injured.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, youth, psychiatric and psychological reports indicating involvement of Mental Health Services for several years.  Defendant could not explain why he had started the fire, other than being intoxicated and "bored".  Claimed he initially attempted to extinguish the fire but was unsuccessful.  Telephoned 999 but only after a member of the public had already done so.  Expressed remorse for the risk he had posed to the hotel residents by lighting the fire.

Previous Convictions:

11 convictions for 68 offences.  Had breached Probation Orders 9 times: breached Community Service Orders 4 times: committed 13 offences whilst on bail.  One previous conviction for fire-setting.

Conclusions:

Total: 4 years 1 week's imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Total: 3½ years' imprisonment.

The Court commended the actions of the members of the public who alerted the Fire and Ambulance Services.

S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. J. Haines for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Arson is always a serious offence because of the risk of the fire getting out of control, and that is what happened here.  You lit some cardboard boxes outside the fire exit of the Royal Hotel.  When the night porter opened the door to investigate the fire spread into the hotel.  As a result the 48 residents had to be evacuated in the middle of the night and there was damage to the hotel which is estimated at nearly £100,000.

2.        No real explanation has been put before us.  It is said that you committed this offence on the spur of the moment when very intoxicated and we sentence you on that basis.  However it is not wholly on the spur of the moment in the sense that you tried to light the fire across the road on more than one occasion before moving to the fire door of the hotel where the conditions for lighting it were better.

3.        Mr Haines has argued that the consequences of the fire were more serious than would otherwise have been the case because the night porter opened the fire door.  But that is exactly why arson is treated as a serious offence.  There are so often unexpected and uncertain consequences because fires can so easily get out of control.  In our judgment it was foreseeable that somebody might open this door, people might have tried to use the fire door to get out, or as happens someone might have investigated.  It was not so unforeseeable as to take this out of the consequences of your actions and therefore we do not think it right to make any reduction for the fact that the fire door was opened and the damage was therefore more serious than might otherwise have been the case.

4.        You have a poor record including one previous offence of fire-setting, albeit very minor, when you were 15.

5.        Mr Haines has spoken in mitigation.  He has emphasised your guilty plea right from the start, which entitles you to a full discount.  We also accept that you are remorseful, you phoned 999 at the time and you gave your name to the Fire Service.  Significantly we accept that you have made real efforts to turn your life around since you were released from youth custody in October 2005 and we commend you for that and it goes to your credit.  We have read all the various reports, the social enquiry report, the drug and alcohol and psychiatric reports, and we have taken note of what is in there, although we do note that there is a high risk of re-offending.  We have also taken note of your youth and of the letters from you and from your father; and we have considered the other points made by Mr Haines.

6.        Taking all these into account we think the correct sentence is as follows.  On Count 1; 1 week's imprisonment, on Count 3; 3 ½ years' imprisonment, consecutive.  We hope very much that you will continue to take full advantage of the help that you are being given in prison and we commend you for the efforts you have been making so far.

7.        We would like to also commend Mr Basilico for his very responsible actions that evening in spotting the fire and in alerting the Fire Services.

No Authorities