Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - grave and criminal assault - drugs - possession - Class C.

[2013]JRC011

Royal Court

(Samedi)

18 January 2013

The Attorney General

-v-

Timothy Jason Stewart Miller

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

Age:  20.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant had spent the evening drinking in town with friends.  They had argued with the victim and his female companion in La Cala and had been asked to leave.  The defendant was described as being "verbally abusive" in a "horrible and upsetting way". 

At closing time the defendant and his friends met the victim and his companion by accident in King Street.  The incident was captured on police CCTV.  The defendant ran up to the victim, and without provocation, punched him in the face causing him to fall over.  Whilst the victim was on the floor, the defendant kicked him once to the body.  The victim's companion tried to help him but was pushed away.  After the victim had got up again the defendant punched him hard a second time, causing the victim to double over.  The defendant then launched a very hard kick straight up into the victim's face whilst he was in this position, before leaving the scene.  The defendant's behaviour throughout was full of aggression and bravado.  The victim sustained a fractured cheek and nose. 

The defendant was arrested the following day and during a search of his accommodation some needles were found.  At this point the defendant volunteered 10 millilitres of testosterone esters containing 400 milligrams per millilitre.  He said that he was using the drug to bulk up and admitted taking a 400 mg dose on the day prior to the assault. 

During interview and upon viewing the CCTV, the defendant admitted the assault and said that he was ashamed of his behaviour.  He said that he had let his family down. 

There was a report from Dr Gafoor before the Court which confirmed that testosterone and its synthetic derivatives appear to facilitate aggression in young males, and that the level of violence associated with the defendant's recent offending had increased with the onset of his steroid abuse. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas; youth and remorse.  He volunteered testosterone to police during search. 

Previous Convictions:

Two previous convictions for grave and criminal assault, both in 2012.  The second was committed in breach of a Community Service Order for the first and resulted in a sentence of youth detention. 

Conclusions:

Total: 2 years and 3 months' youth detention. 

Compensation Order in favour of the victim sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Despite the mitigation the Court decided that the Crown's conclusions were correct.  In addition to the sentence of youth detention, the Court also made a compensation order in the sum of £1,820 and a 6 month exclusion order to run from the date of the defendant's release. 

Total: 2 years youth detention.

Compensation Order made in the sum of £1,820 in favour of the victim or 3 months' youth detention in default.

Exclusion Order made for a period of 6 months from the date of release from custody from all licensed premises except 6^th category licensed premises including the Terminal at Jersey Harbour, Jersey Airport, The Opera House, the Multiplex Cinema etc.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered. 

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

Advocate D. Corbel for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Mr Millar, you are here to be sentenced on an Indictment which contains two counts, and the serious count on the Indictment is the charge of grave and criminal assault.  You were out with friends at a club and on leaving it you came across, subsequently, persons you had met inside the club earlier and an incident took place which was caught on CCTV.  It shows that you walked up to the victim and punched him in the face, causing him to fall to the floor.  You were then seen to kick him while he was on the floor; he got up after a time and went across the road and you then followed him and you punched him again, hard, in the face, and as he doubled over you then ran at him and launched a hard kick straight into his face as he was bent over. 

2.        The result was a cracked fracture of the nasal bones and a fracture of the left infraorbital margin, although there was no evidence of any displacement but the Court notes that there was a fracture to what I would regard as something close to if not the cheek bone.  It is apparent that your behaviour was made worse by having taken an amount of testosterone and alcohol. 

3.        The Court has spent a good deal of time considering this matter because you have so much going for you.  You are an intelligent young man; the references show that you have many good qualities; you have family support and the Court is impressed with the apologies which you have written to the victim and to his family and we have given anxious thought to the legislation which applies to you because you are now 20 years old.  Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 requires us not to pass a sentence of youth detention unless we think there is no other appropriate way of dealing with you and we note that your counsel has rightly pointed out that you have not had a Probation Order previously.  But having given it anxious thought the Court considers that this offence is simply too serious to be treated in any other way.  It was a serious, unprovoked, vicious assault.  You could have snapped the victim's neck with that kick when he was doubled over, you could have killed him quite easily.  It took place only two weeks after you were released from an earlier sentence of youth detention, and as I said, was alcohol-induced, and the Court has said many times that we simply will not permit drunken assaults on the streets of St Helier to be treated other than extremely seriously. 

4.        Despite the mitigation that you have, the guilty plea and everything that was very fully and well said by your counsel, we think that the Crown's conclusions of 2 years' youth detention on Count 1 are correct and on that Count you are sentenced to 2 years' youth detention.  You will have the opportunity in custody of continuing the work you have started already and the Court very much commends that to you.  We also sentence you to 3 months' youth detention on Count 2, however applying the totality principle we think the 3 months should run concurrently and not consecutively, and so the total will be 2 years' youth detention. 

5.        We have given thought then to the question of a Compensation Order in favour of the victim.  It is apparent that he has suffered immediate losses of £700 plus an on-going loss of wages and when we looked at the right sentence to impose upon you, and the nature of the offence, we had very careful regard to his victim impact statement which shows what a dreadful impact the assault had on him.  It is clear that he has had his job downgraded as a result of this assault and we are going to make a Compensation Order in his favour of £1,820 which reflects, as far as we can tell, the lost wages from the date of the assault to today.  If that Compensation Order is not paid within the next 12 months you will serve an additional 3 months' youth detention. 

6.        We are also going to make an Exclusion Order which is going to run for 6 months from the date you are released from custody.  That means that you are not to go into any licensed premises for 6 months after your release.  Excluded from the Order will be shops that sell food and places of entertainment and the Harbour and the Airport, and that Order is being imposed not so much as an additional penalty, but for your protection.  What the Court is anxious you should not do is come out from youth detention or custody and celebrate and get yourself into trouble again and so there is a strong protective element to imposing that Exclusion Order and it runs for 6 months from the date of your release. 

7.        This offence is a personal tragedy for the victim and for you.  You can get past it and you should use your time in custody to ensure that you do. 

8.        We also the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs. 

Authorities

Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

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

AG-v-Richomme [2006] JRC 068.

AG-v-Smith aka Aldridge [2007] JRC 003.