Jersey Unreported Judgments

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG -v- Mahe [2007] JRC 183 (27 September 2007)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2007/2007_183.html
Cite as: [2007] JRC 183

[New search] [Help]

[2007]JRC183

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

27^th September 2007

Before :

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats de Veulle, Bullen, Allo, Newcombe and Liddiard.

The Attorney General

-v-

Terry John Mahé

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 13th July, 2007, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Present Indictment

1 count of:	Dangerous driving contrary to Article 22(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 1).
1 count of:	Driving whilst disqualified contrary to Article 15(4) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 2).
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 3).
1 count of:	Malicious damage. (Count 4).

Breach of Probation Order made on 14^th October 2005 following conviction on:

Former Indictment

1 count of:	Aiding, assisting or participating in a larceny. (Count 1A).
1 count of:	Illegal entry of commercial premises. (Count 2).
13 count of:	Breaking and entering commercial premises. (Counts 3-12 and 15-17).
2 counts of:	Breaking and entering a dwelling house. (Counts14 and 18).
1 count of:	Aiding, assisting or participating in the breaking or entering of commercial premises. (Count 13A).
2 counts of:	Taking and driving away a motor vehicle without the owner's consent contrary to Article 53(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Counts 19 and 22).
1 count of:	Driving without a licence, contrary to Article 4(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956. (Count 20).
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 21).

Age: 25.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Police saw him driving whilst disqualified. High speed chase ensued involving the accused, ignoring traffic lights, speeding unchecked across junctions. Speeds of up to 65 mph through town streets at 3 am. Smashed through gates of reservoir and damaged security lights (total value of damage = £1,300). Set fire to the car, of which he was part owner, so no change was pursued.

Details of Mitigation:

Long and persistent record for (primarily) dishonesty and motoring offences, but since being given probation last time had stayed out of trouble for 17 months. Completed community service well; in employment; took parenthood seriously. No re-offending while on bail. Voluntary repayment for damage caused this time.

Previous Convictions:

As described above; these offences put him in breach of existing probation orders, for which he had to be re-sentenced. See AG v Mahé and Others [2005] JRC 144A.

Conclusions:

Former Indictment

Count 1A:	6 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Counts 3-12:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Counts 13A and 15:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 14:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 17:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 18:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 19:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent (3 years' disqualification to remain in place, less the time already served).
Count 20:	No re-sentencing required (a fine having been imposed and paid).

Total: 12 months' imprisonment.

Present Indictment

Count 1:	12 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	12 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 4:	9 months' imprisonment, consecutive.

Total: 3 years' and 6 months' imprisonment on present indictment and 12 months' consecutive on former indictment making a total of 4 years' and 6 months' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

240 hours' Community Service Order and 2 years' Probation, custodial sanction would have been 18 months' imprisonment in total (3 months consecutive on the breach offences).

Community Service Order made up of the following (the custodial sentence that would have been applied appears in brackets):

Count 1:	180 hours' Community Service Order (12 months' imprisonment.)
Count 2:	150 hours' Community Service Order, concurrent, (9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.)
Count 3:	150 hours' Community Service Order, concurrent, (9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.)
Count 4:	60 hours' Community Service Order, consecutive, (3 months' imprisonment, consecutive.)

2 years' disqualification from driving.

Probation Order on former indictment is discharged.

Continue to pay £50 to JNWWC until sum of £1,313.75 is paid.

C. E. Whelan, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. L. Preston for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1. This was an appallingly dangerous piece of driving, involving a chase at high speed through the streets of St Helier, including going the wrong way up one-way streets and driving at speed straight across junctions. Although it took place at 3 a.m. it was, nevertheless, as one of the pursuing Police Officers said, "nothing short of miraculous" that no one was hurt.

2. It is particularly disappointing now to find you before the Court for these offences. You have an appalling record, but in October 2005 the Inferior Number took a real chance on you. It decided not to send you to prison for a string of burglaries, but placed you on Probation and imposed Community Service. The frustrating thing is that, until the events of 10^th March this year, you had repaid that trust which the Court had placed in you and you were really turning your life around. For example, you had carried out the Community Service in an exemplary fashion, as reported by the Service; you had been in regular employment and we have received references from your employer; you had responded well to Probation; you had given up drugs and random testing showed that this was so; and, most importantly, you had displayed a new maturity towards life and you were being a good father to your son. You have put all that progress at risk by your actions on the evening in question. The Court made it clear to you, when it put you on Probation, that should you re-offend you would be highly likely to go to prison.

3. Against that background Mr Preston urges that we should take an exceptional course and give you another chance. He points out not only the real progress that you have made, which I have just described, but also the fact that since this incident you have been on bail, you have continued your progress, you have not re-offended and you have repaid, voluntarily, £950 towards the damage to the Waterworks Company gates.

4. The Court has found this to be an extremely difficult decision and the Court is divided. One Jurat feels that your breach of the opportunity given to you is such that there is no alternative to prison, but the majority, after considerable hesitation, have concluded that society's best interests in this case would be served by trying to maintain and build on the progress you have made. They feel that to send you to prison for what was, in effect, ten minutes of madness, would place at risk all the progress and would also create a real chance of your returning to your old ways and that would not be in society's interests, just as it would not be in your interests; but you have to be punished for these offences.

5. On Count 1 we are going to impose a Community Service Order of 180 hours, on Count 2; 150 hours, on Count 3; 150 hours, all of those concurrent. On Count 4, which is malicious damage, 60 hours, consecutive. That makes up in total to the maximum of 240 hours Community Service. We also disqualify you from driving for 2 years, concurrent on Counts 1, 2 and 3. We discharge the existing Probation Order and we are going to make a new one for 2 years, and that will be concurrent on the 4 Counts I have just mentioned, and also on all the offences for which you are presently in breach and which form the previous indictment. You will, of course, have to carry out the courses and do all the other things that the Probation Officer directs. We are also going to impose a condition of the Probation that you continue to make £50 per week repayments to the Waterworks until it is fully repaid

6. Now we must state what the alternative prison sentence we had in mind would be, and we say that the total would have been 18 months, made up as follows: on Count 1; 12 months, on Count 2; 9 months, on Count 3; 9 months, all concurrent. On Count 4; 3 months, consecutive, and we would have imposed 3 months, consecutive, also on all the breach offences because of the fact that you had carried out all the Community Service.

7. Now Mr Mahé you have been extraordinarily fortunate for a second time. The Court urges, in particular, that you really must not have any interest in a car and you must not drive. You are disqualified from driving and if you cannot resist temptation again then you know the consequences. Indeed you must realise, given how fortunate you have been, that this is your last chance. If you come up before us again then there really will be no alternative but to send you to prison, regardless of the amount of progress that you have made. You were given a chance last time, we are giving you a further chance. We are impressed with the progress you have made and that is what has saved you today, but it would not save you on a future occasion if you cannot stop reoffending. So this is your chance, but it is your last chance.

No Authorities