Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2009]JRC192

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

9^th October 2009

The Attorney General

-v-

Paul Anthony Cook

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

Age:  28.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The accused became involved in an altercation outside Fridays Bar in Halkett Place with the Assistant General Manager Mr Jakub Wankowkz.  He threw two punches at Wankowkz.  The first punch connected with the left side of Mr Wankowkz's face in the region of his eye.  The second did not make contact.  The momentum of the second punch caused the accused to fall to the floor.  The police doctor later examined Mr Wankowkz but found no injuries (Count 1). 

The accused was restrained by two doormen and the police arrived.  During the course of his arrest and detention he was consistently aggressive and abusive.  The accused was heavily intoxicated.  At one point he kicked out backwards striking a police officer on the leg but causing no injury (Count 2). 

Before being placed in a police car a lump of cannabis resin weighing 11.66g (street value £80) was recovered from his person (Count 3). 

During a subsequent search of the accused's flat the police recovered various mobiles and Sim cards, small quantities of cash, a further four pieces of cannabis from a rucksack (total weight 27.94g street value between £140 and £160) and two "nine bars" of cannabis (weighing 256.80g and 252.51g, respectively - wholesale value between £1,800 and £2,200 - street value in the region of £2,520 to £2,880).  They also recovered a piece of clear tape containing fragments of MDMA (no separate charge). 

During interview the accused consistently denied punching Mr Wankowkz and asked to see CCTV evidence.  He said he did not remember kicking a police officer as he had been drunk.  He initially declined to comment in respect of the "nine bars" and further four pieces of cannabis recovered from his flat or in respect of the cannabis recovered from his person.  Towards the conclusion of the interview he said he intended smoking all of the cannabis which had been recovered as he had a heavy habit and loved his weed. 

Details of Mitigation:

Residual youth.  Guilty pleas.  Remorse.

Previous Convictions:

Record containing convictions for resisting or obstructing a police officer, assault on the police and possessing cannabis.  He had previously been subject to a variety of non-custodial disposals.

Conclusions:

Total:  8 months' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Exclusion from licensed premises for a period of 12 months from date of release from prison.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

In the view of the Court the conclusions moved for by the Crown were correct.  Ordinarily, the Court would have been minded to grant the conclusions.  However, the accused had turned his life around.  The Court had been impressed by the references, in particular those indicating the accused had become involved in coaching youngsters at a football club and had offered to assist the police by attending schools and talking about his drug addiction.  Whilst the accused had not previously responded to chances given to him the Court believed he had now "seen the light."  However, if he came back before the Court he would run the risk of custodial sentence.  In the circumstances the following sentences would be imposed:-

Total:  140 hours' Community Service Order, or 8 months' imprisonment in default, plus a 12 month Probation Order

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Exclusion from licensed premises for a period of 3 months from date of release from prison.

A. J. Belhomme, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate R. Tremoceiro for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        The conclusions of the Crown Advocate, in the view of the Court, correctly represent the offences which you have committed and we would ordinarily have granted them.  Nonetheless you do seem to have turned your life around.  We are impressed with the references which we have read.  We are also impressed by the work that you have done with the boys at Trinity Football Club and by your response to the request of the police to share with young people your experience of what damage drug addiction can do to people.  It must be said that you have not responded to the chances you have been given by the Court before, but we have been persuaded that you have finally seen the light.  If we are wrong you will come back before this Court and it is very likely that you will go to prison.  We are going to impose a non-custodial sentence.

2.        On Count 4 we are going to sentence you to a 1 year Probation Order and we order you to perform 120 hours' Community Service with an alternative of 6 months' imprisonment and on Counts 1, 2 and 3 we order you to perform 20 hours' Community Service with an alternative of 2 months' imprisonment.  The sentences on those three counts to be concurrent with each other but consecutive to Count 4, making a total sentence of 140 hours' Community Service with an alternative of 8 months' imprisonment, a Probation Order for 1 year and we are going to make an Exclusion Order for 3 months in order to encourage you over the Christmas period not to over-indulge.

3.        We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

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

Campbell, Molloy and MacKenzie-v-AG [1995] JLR 136.

AG-v-Skeete 2002/130

AG-v-Mears [2008] JRC 217.

AG-v-Rodrigues 2000/100