Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2008]JRC218

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

15^th December 2008

The Attorney General

-v-

Christopher Michael Rowe

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

First Indictment

Second Indictment

Age:  23.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On the First Indictment, the victim was returning home in the early hours from a night out with his brother and a friend.  The victim and his brother were both intoxicated and arguing.  Rowe had also been out drinking and was on his way to a friend's home.  He asked the victim's party for directions.  They were unable to help him and as a result Rowe became aggressive before leaving the group.  The victim and his brother continued arguing before the brother walked off with the friend.  The victim followed Rowe into St Mark's Road, making verbal threats, and a confrontation resulted when Rowe turned to face him.  Rowe punched his victim to the ground.  When he tried to get up Rowe punched him in the face four times.  At no stage did the victim assault Rowe and he offered no resistance during the attack.  Rowe left his victim lying on the ground and walked the short distance up the road to where he was staying.  Some witnesses to the assault directed police officers to the house which Rowe had entered where he admitted the assault and was arrested.  His victim suffered severe bruising and cuts to his face and left eye (completely closed) and a dislocated shoulder.  There was evidence of psychological trauma.  In interview, Rowe admitted the assault and said that he was trained in close protection work having served in the military police and as a bodyguard.

On the Second indictment, Rowe was seen by police officers to be arguing with door staff of the Royal Yacht Hotel.  He was becoming increasingly agitated, aggressive and swearing.  The door staff beckoned the police to intervene.  It was explained to Rowe that he would not be going back into the Royal Yacht and he was told on numerous occasions that he would be arrested if he did not leave the area.  Whilst being escorted by police officers toward a taxi rank, he turned around and started walking back to the Royal Yacht.  He was then arrested.  This was just days before he was due to be sentenced on the First Indictment.

Details of Mitigation:

Rowe was treated as a first offender.  He still had the benefit of residual youth.  He pleaded guilty and was co-operative throughout the judicial process.  The Court accepted that there was an element of minor provocation by the victim on the First Indictment.  A letter of remorse was provided to the Court together with evidence of Rowe's previous good character.  Rowe had served in the Army from the age of 16 to 20 years, with service in Iraq and Bosnia.  He could no longer work in personal security as a result of the conviction.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Starting point 4½ years' imprisonment.

Second Indictment

Total:  2½ years' imprisonment and £200 fine or 14 days' imprisonment in default to run consecutively.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court sentenced Rowe on his version of events accepting that there was an element of provocation by the victim.  It concluded that Rowe had simply lost his temper.  Anxious consideration was given to the possibility of treating the case as exceptional enough to warrant a non-custodial sentence given the excellent mitigation.  However, in view of the Court's stated policy on punishing such offences of violence, the Court concluded a term of imprisonment was inevitable.  It did, however, impose a lesser sentence than had been sought and Rowe received 18 months' imprisonment.  On the Second Indictment, Rowe was fined £200 and the default of 14 days would run consecutively.

First Indictment

Second Indictment

Total:  18 months' imprisonment and £200 fine to be paid within 1 month or 14 days' imprisonment in default.

A. D. Robinson, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate A. D. Field for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Christopher Rowe, you have an exemplary record.  You have no previous convictions, you have served in the Army with distinction, including periods in Iraq and Bosnia, you are described by the reports and by those who have given references as being courteous and sociable.  So what induced you to behave as you did on this night, we find it hard to understand.  We accept that there was verbal provocation and a minor element of physical provocation from the victim but as you yourself said when interviewed by the Police, he was never any threat to you, particularly with your background and experience, yet you knocked him to the ground, you punched him again as he got up, knocking him down to the ground again, and you then punched him some three to four further occasions to his face.  It is clear that you simply lost your temper.  The consequences for him were serious.  He suffered a fracture to his cheekbone and a dislocated left shoulder, together with considerable bruising, as we have seen from the photographs, as well as cuts. When he gave his victim impact statement in October, he still suffered from blurred vision, from headaches and from pain in his shoulder.  His work and his confidence had been affected.

2.        Miss Field has spoken powerfully in mitigation and there is much to be said on your behalf.  She spoke of your guilty plea and the fact that you had immediately admitted fully what happened.  She spoke, as I have already, of your exemplary record, the fact that you have no previous convictions and, as I say, given distinguished service to the Crown in the armed services.  We have read the references which you provided and they all speak highly of you.  It is clear that you are extremely remorseful, this comes across from the Social Enquiry Report and we have read your letter this morning and we are satisfied that you are indeed remorseful for what you did on this occasion.  You are also assessed by the Probation Service as being at low risk of re-offending and we have taken into account all those matters and indeed the other matters listed by your Advocate this morning.

3.        Taking into account the fact that no feet were used, no weapon was used on this occasion and the very powerful mitigation which we have listened to, we think the conclusions of the Crown can be reduced.  What has given us additional cause for concern, and you can see from the time we have taken to discuss this matter, is whether in these exceptional circumstances, it is possible to proceed by way of a non-custodial sentence.  We accept that you are at low risk of re-offending but the Court has repeatedly said that there is too much drunken violence on the streets in Jersey and that those who get involved in it can expect to receive a custodial sentence.  In this case the offence and the injuries received were too serious to enable us not to impose an immediate sentence.

4.        The sentence of the Court is one of 18 months' imprisonment on Count 1.  On Count 2, you do have savings from which you can pay a fine so we are going to impose a fine of £200.  This must be paid within 1 month, in default there will be 14 days' imprisonment consecutive to the 18 months.

Authorities

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.