Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2010]JRC141

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

30^th July 2010

The Attorney General

-v-

Dawn Dauny

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

To be taken into consideration in accordance with the Criminal Justice (Taking of Offences into Consideration)(Jersey) Rules, 2000.

8 offences of larceny. 

68 offences of obtaining goods or services by false pretences. 

Age:  28.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Soon after returning to Jersey from university, Dauny became friendly with Julian Hiscock, the owner of Skin Scene Tattoo Studio.  She began helping him at his shop though she was never formally employed.  After a time she came to an agreement with Mr Hiscock to sell clothes from part of his shop.  From September 2007 Dauny began to take a more active role in the Studio ordering stock and arranging for bills to be paid, effectively taking control of the financial side of the business.  Over a period of approximately 6 months she used Mr Hiscock's cheque book to write cheques to herself on 6 occasions.  The total amount obtained was £5,800 (Counts 11-16). 

Dauny also used Mr Hiscock's NatWest credit card on more than 70 occasions, mainly to buy clothes and accessories.  6 of these uses, totalling just under £2,750 form the basis of counts 5-10 on the Indictment.  A further 68 uses, totalling over £7,000 were taken into consideration. 

During the period in question Dauny rented the flat above the Studio with three friends.  As she had housing qualifications she was the tenant.  Her flatmates paid her £300 a month each to be passed to Mr Hiscock.  In fact Dauny kept the money and did not pay it into Mr Hiscock's account.  2 of these payments form the basis of Counts 3 and 4 on the Indictment.  7 further payments were to be taken into consideration, along with a further larceny of £350 from the apprentice tattooist that Dauny was supposed to have used to buy equipment. 

Over the period in which the offences were committed Dauny also stole a quantity of postal mail from Mr Hiscock, namely bank statements and other letters that would have revealed her offences (Count 1). 

The total amount obtained by Dauny was over £19,000. 

Dauny's actions delayed Mr Hiscock's proposed move to France for more than a year due to the financial loss.  Dauny has no assets and therefore there was no prospect of recovering any of the money through a compensation order. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea and co-operative with the police.  Remorseful. 

Defence argued that the case was exceptional given Dauny's personal circumstances.  She was pregnant and also had a 10 month old daughter.  There were no mother and baby facilities at La Moye.  According to the reports the offences were committed in an attempt to gain acceptance by doing favours for friends.  Dauny was described as vulnerable with a dependant personality and compulsive buying disorder. 

Previous Convictions:

One previous conviction for theft by employee for which she received community service.  She did not complete this and the sentence was varied to a suspended prison sentence of 3 months.  Further convictions resulting from the failure to complete the community service and one offence of drink driving. 

Conclusions:

Total:  2 years' imprisonment. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Offences involving a breach of trust will generally lead to a custodial sentence except in exceptional circumstances.  The Court had regard to the mitigation and did not consider that it amounted to exceptional circumstances.  However they would reduce the Crown's conclusions in light of the length of time between offences and charge, pregnancy and the psychological report. 

Total:  12 months' imprisonment. 

C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R Bell for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        This is a difficult case but, as the Court has stated on many occasions, offences involving a breach of trust of this kind almost invariably attract a custodial sentence.  The offences in this case were particularly mean and had a very serious effect upon the businessman from whom the defendant stole and whom she deceived over a period of seven months.  The amount involved was of the order of £19,000 although some of that loss has been transferred to the bank.  The defendant has a previous conviction for theft from an employer for which a Community Service Order was imposed. 

2.        The Court has heard a very eloquent plea from counsel for the defendant who has said everything that could possibly be said on her behalf.  The defendant has pleaded guilty and has expressed remorse for her actions.  The length of time between the commission of the offences and sentence is considerable and we are going to take that very much into account. 

3.        We have considered carefully the report of the chartered psychologist and his diagnosis of compulsive buying disorder; we have also considered the fact that after her interview by the police, the defendant became pregnant and now has a child aged ten months.  We also take into account of the fact that she is now again pregnant and that the baby is due in about seven months' time.  These factors do not, in our judgement, amount to exceptional circumstances calling for a non-custodial sentence. 

4.        Miss Dauny, you knew what you were doing and you very honestly said that it was all too easy but you caused considerable damage to your victim and to his family and the Court, regrettably, has no alternative but to impose a prison sentence. 

5.        We are going to reduce the conclusions only because of the long delay between the commission of the offences and today, which was not entirely of your making, your family circumstances, which we understand, and the contents of the psychological report. 

6.        The sentence of the Court is that you will go to prison for 12 months, concurrently on each Count. 

Authorities

Kirkland-v-AG [2001] JCA 200.

AG-v-Harris [2004] JRC 020.

AG-v-Congdon [2001] JRC 231.

AG-v-Pallot [2010] JRC 122.