Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - various motoring - larceny - breaking and entry and larceny - breach of the peace.

[2012]JRC203

Royal Court

(Samedi)

2 November 2012

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Le Cornu and Liston.

The Attorney General

-v-

Luke Brian Bingle

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

1 count of:	Driving a motor vehicle at a speed in excess of the prescribed limit, contrary to Article 21(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Using a motor vehicle whilst carrying an excessive number of passengers in a dangerous manner (Count 2).
2 counts of:	Using a motor vehicle whilst uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance)(Jersey) Law 1948 (Counts 3 and 9).
1 count of:	Driving motor vehicle on a road whilst failing to wear a prescribed seat belt. (Count 4).
1 count of:	Failing to produce a driving licence for examination (Count 5).
1 count of:	Dangerous driving, contrary to Article 22(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 6).
1 count of:	Driving a motor vehicle with an alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit (Count 7).
1 count of:	Driving a motor vehicle as a provisional licence holder whilst failing to comply with the prescribed conditions attached to the said licence (Count 8).
2 counts of:	Larceny (Counts 10 and 12).
1 count of:	Breaking and entering and larceny (Count 11).
1 count of:	Breach of the peace (Count 13).

Age:  22.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Counts 1-5

The defendant was stopped by honorary police following a speed check where he was recorded at 37 mph in a 30mph limit (Count 1).  He was not wearing a seat belt (Count 4).  There were four passengers seated in the car and a fifth in the boot area behind the rear seats (Count 2), making a total of six occupants.  (The car was a small hatchback).  It was noted that the windscreen insurance disc had expired some four months previously, and the defendant was issued with as formal request to produce his licence and insurance within 48 hours.  He failed to produce these (Count 5) and it transpired that he was not insured (Count 3). 

Counts 6-9

The following day, Sunday, 15^th April, 2012, the defendant crashed his vehicle in a single-track country lane, overturning it onto its roof.  It was daylight, conditions were dry and traffic, generally, was light.  He claimed he had been a passenger and that someone else who had fled the scene was driving the vehicle.  The defendant had been driving and was carrying two passengers.  They had all been drinking vodka before the defendant drove.  He told his passengers to put on some good tunes and put on their seatbelts, "I'm going to push it".  One of the passengers noted the speedometer record speeds of 45-50mph.  The defendant lost control of the vehicle, clipped a bank and overturned it onto its roof (Count 6).  The passengers stated that the defendant fabricated the story about someone else driving and that he had asked them to give this version to the police.  He was found to have a breath/alcohol content of 42ug/100ml.  The defendant admitted that he had been driving the vehicle earlier on that day without being accompanied by a qualified driver (Count 8).  He also admitted that he had no insurance cover (Count 9). 

Count 10

On Monday, 16^th April, 2012, the defendant and his 16 year old friend stole a bottle of vodka valued at £24.99 from Iceland, 4-5 The Parade, St Helier, by placing it into the waistband of the 16 year-old's trousers and leaving the store without paying.  The act was recorded on the store's CCTV.  In interview he admitted that the theft had been planned and that neither of them had any money to pay for the alcohol. 

Count 11

The resident of a St Peter property returned home on 26^th April, 2012, to discover that his home had been broken into and several items taken.  Amongst those items were computers, watches and jewellery of both monetary and sentimental value.  The total value of the items stolen was £3,922.48.  Two windows had been broken to gain entry into the property.  The break-in occurred during daylight hours when the property was unoccupied.  A fingerprint analysis on a watch box at the scene matched the defendant's.  Of the stolen items, only a laptop computer was recovered. 

Count 12

On 1^st May, 2012, the defendant and his 16 year old friend entered the premises known as the Co-Operative Store St Peter.  The defendant stole a bottle of Bells whisky, his friend stole a bottle of vodka.  The store's Night Supervisor followed them into the car park where they were sitting in a vehicle.  The defendant initially asserted that they had paid for the alcohol, but after some time, he handed over the bottle of whisky; his friend retained the vodka.  The Supervisor continued to request the return of the other bottle and with this the defendant began to swear at him.  The defendant was later identified, having left the scene and following his eventual arrest he admitted planning to steal the alcohol. 

Count 13

At around 05:35hrs on 20^th June, 2012, the police were called to an incident at Nicolle Close Flats, St Helier where, as a result of a reported disturbance, neighbours complained of shouting and swearing and that three men had been fighting, one of whom had been injured.  The third man remained at the scene but the other two involved had fled.  The defendant was identified by association.  He was arrested and initially responded with "no comment" to the questions posed to him, he then denied being at the scene.  He later admitted to being there and described an altercation that took place between him and two other males in which he and another male had forcibly ejected the injured male from the property, but did not admit to being outside or to fighting.  The other, non-injured male admitted common assault. 

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown has taken account of the defendant's residual youth at 22 years of age.  To all counts the defendant entered pleas of guilty on Indictment.  In relation to Counts 10 and 12, the shoplifting, the defendant readily admitted to the offences. 

Previous Convictions:

The defendant had a significant number of offences, all committed in England between 2008 and 2011.  In total he had eighteen convictions, seven of those for theft, including a burglary of a non-dwelling.  His record also indicated a history of a failure to respond to non-custodial sentences. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	£50 fine or 12 days' imprisonment, in default.
Count 2:	£100 fine or 12 days' imprisonment, in default.
Count 3:	4 months' imprisonment.
Count 4:	No separate penalty.
Count 5:	No separate penalty.
Count 6:	6 months' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 3, and 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 7:	£500 fine or 6 weeks' imprisonment in default and 12 months' disqualification from driving.
Count 8:	£100 fine or 12 days' imprisonment in default.
Count 9:	8 months' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 6.
Count 10:	1 month's imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 11:	2 years' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.
Count 12:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.
Count 13:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.

Total: 3 years' imprisonment plus 2 years' disqualification from driving and a fine in the amount of £750.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court regarded the defendant as a one-man crime wave and noted that the background report and other material was not very encouraging.  A letter of explanation and remorse was supplied to the Court on sentencing and was taken into consideration in reducing the Crown's overall conclusions by 6 months.  The Court took into consideration the guilty pleas on Indictment and the defendant's personal circumstances.  However, the Court stated that it was right that a lengthy prison sentence be served and that the offences of driving without insurance and driving dangerously be served consecutively. 

Count 1:	No separate penalty.
Count 2:	No separate penalty.
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment.
Count 4:	No separate penalty.
Count 5:	No separate penalty.
Count 6:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent, plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 7:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, plus 12 months' disqualification from driving..
Count 8:	No separate penalty.
Count 9:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 10:	1 month's imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 11:	2 years' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.
Count 12:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.
Count 13:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent to Count 10.

Total:  2 years and 6 months' imprisonment plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.

Ms S. J. O'Donnell, Crown Advocate.

Advocate C. M. Fogarty for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are here to be sentenced on what your counsel described as something of a one-man crime wave, or words to that effect.  That was over a period of some three months when you committed a series of driving offences and some shoplifting, breaking and entering and larceny, and a breach of the peace. 

2.        The Court has been out for some time considering what we should impose by way of sentence because the background material that we have read is not very encouraging as you will understand.  To us the fact that you have completed your Army Training successfully should have led you to recognise that driving in the way that you did and the other driving offences that you committed were completely irresponsible.  You could have killed somebody.  You could have maimed them for life.  And had it been you on the receiving end of that sort of conduct, you would feel thoroughly aggrieved because your life would have been ruined.  Now we understand that you were age 22 and so maybe you did not think things through as well as you should but your Army Training should have got you to that point.  We do give you some credit for your youth, but it is a small amount of credit for the reasons I have given. 

3.        Then we come to look at the breaking and entering and larceny charge and the victim personal impact statement, which again shows what an impact your offence caused.  There is this man who is living quite happily out in the countryside.  He had been living there for fourteen months, and then suddenly he is burgled and he is no longer comfortable in his own home.  You should appreciate these consequences flow from your own conduct.  At the end of the day the Court is sentencing you today for what you have done. 

4.        Of course we recognise, not just your youth as I have said, but we recognise your guilty plea and that some bad things have happened to you in the last few years, but at the end of the day it is only you that can get past those problems and you have a choice.  Your record is not as bad as some that we have seen in this Court but it is not good, and it is frankly, time that you grew up and realised that the way you conduct your life in the future is going to be down to you and nobody else.  You have written us a good letter which we have taken into account and for that reason, and to give you some encouragement and some hope, we are going to reduce the Crown's conclusions, although not by a huge amount. 

5.        We think that it is right that you should serve a lengthy prison sentence for the breaking and entering of domestic dwelling accommodation, and we think that it is right that a consecutive sentence should be imposed for the driving without insurance and dangerous driving charges for the reasons I have given. 

6.        Accordingly, on the Indictment, you are sentenced as follows, we are imposing custodial sentences and not fines because you cannot afford to pay them and we are going to sentence you as follows.  On Counts 1 and 2; no separate penalty, on Count 3; 2 months' imprisonment; on Counts 4 and 5; no separate penalty, on Count 6; 6 months' imprisonment and 2 years' disqualification, on Count 7; 1 month's imprisonment and the mandatory 12 months' disqualification, on Count 8; no separate penalty, on Count 9; 6 months' imprisonment, and all those sentences will be served concurrently with each other so that means that there is a 6 month prison sentence for that collection of offences.  On Count 10 you will be sentenced to 1 month's imprisonment, on Count 11; 2 years' imprisonment, on Count 12; 1 month's imprisonment, on Count 13; 1 month's imprisonment, and that collection also will concurrently, but they will run consecutively to the first collection, so the total sentence is 2 years and 6 months' imprisonment. 

7.        When you are in the prison you will have the opportunity of seeing drugs counsellors and seeing perhaps others who can assist you in prison.  We do suggest that you take advantage of whatever help you can get there, and that by the time you have served that sentence, you might begin to realise that actually it is either going uphill or downhill from when you come out.  It will be down to you which path you choose.  

Authorities

AG-v-Bailey [2009] JLR N 19.

AG-v-Bailey [2009] JRC 077.

Bradbury-v-AG [1985-86] JLR N 24b.

AG-v-Da Silva [1997] JLR N 14a.

AG-v-Da Silva [1997] JRC 218.

R-v-Brewster and Ors [1998] 1 Cr. App. R. 15.

AG-v-Moreira [2003] JRC 083A.

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey, 3^rd Edition.