Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - breach of the peace - grave and criminal assault.

[2013]JRC073

Royal Court

(Samedi)

12 April 2013

The Attorney General

-v-

David Anthony Poingdestre

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

Age:  22.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant exchanged words with the victim (another 22-year old, named Parker) as they walked home after drinking all day separately.  Punches were exchanged without injury (Count 1).  After briefly going home, the defendant, now bare-chested, again met and fought with the victim in the street, inflicting cuts and bruises by further punches (Count 2).  The victim defended himself with a piece of broken glass, cutting the defendant's arms.  Committed whilst subject to Binding-Over Order. 

Details of Mitigation:

Injuries worse than those of the victim; youth; remorse; strongly supportive mother and girlfriend.

Previous Convictions:

11 previous convictions, 6 for violence/public order. 

Conclusions:

Total: 12 months' imprisonment. 

Exclusion Order from 1^st, 4^th and 7^th category premises for a period of 12 months from release from custody sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Total: 180 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 12 months' imprisonment.

Exclusion Order from 1^st, 4^th and 7^th category premises for a period of 12 month from release from custody made.

D. J. Hopwood, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate L. V. Marks for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are here to be sentenced on an Indictment which contains two counts, although it was very much one incident.  The counts involved violence on the streets of St Helier and the Court has made it absolutely plain time and time again, that violence on the streets of St Helier will normally result in a custodial sentence being imposed, particularly where there is the aggravating feature of drunkeness, which is the case here.  Here you were no doubt given some provocation of a kind, some "lip" from the other group, but nothing to justify the way in which you reacted.  You were the person who started this incident and it seems that you do realise that it could have got seriously out of hand, although, frankly, what did happen was bad enough; but you caused the problem in the first place.  You delivered a series of punches on the second occasion which caused some injuries which, although not long-lasting, the photographs that we have seen show that this was a seriously violent incident which took place, and as I say, you would usually be looking at a custodial sentence. 

2.        I want you to realise how serious this offence was and how close you have come to going into custody today.  The Court will not tolerate violence on the streets of St Helier and, were it not for a combination of circumstances, you would be going to prison.  You have had some very good references from your employer, from your mother and from your girlfriend, and that support from those two women is an important feature in the Court's decision today and you should be aware of that.  We do think that this particular assault, and I say this not to minimise it but just because a record is being made and people will look at the judgment of the court, this assault was on the cusp of being a common assault, but it would have been a very serious common assault, and while you have pleaded guilty to a grave and criminal assault, we accept that it was at the lower end of the scale.  We have really had regard to the references you have provided, to your youth, because you are only 22, and to what is in the background report, to your remorse that you have expressed, to the fact you have a good employment record, and taking account of the fact that the other person who undoubtedly injured you in this assault, has been acquitted, and in circumstances where it is perhaps the case that you might have a legitimate sense of grievance because you were injured as well.  Even though you started the incident, having taken account of all those things we think we can avoid a custodial sentence.  We have taken account of the fact that this has been hanging over you for some time.  But I want you to realise that you are very fortunate indeed and we do not expect to see you back in this Court again.  Because if there is another occasion of anything like this then custody is going to follow. 

3.        On Count 1 on the Indictment you are sentenced to 90 hours' Community Service, the alternative would have been 3 months' imprisonment.  On Count 2 on the Indictment you are sentenced to 180 hours' Community Service, the alternative would have been 12 months' imprisonment.  The two sentences of Community Service are to operate concurrently. 

4.        The Court also imposes an Exclusion Order for 12 months in respect of premises which hold 1^st, 4^th and 7^th category licences, that does not apply to the Harbour or to the Airport. 

5.        You should be aware Mr Poingdestre that if you do not perform the Community Service you are liable to be brought back and sentenced again and the Court will be looking without question at a custodial sentence at that time. 

6.        In relation to the Binding-Over Order in the Magistrate's Court in respect of which you are in breach, no further action is to be taken. 

Authorities

AG-v-Brockbank, Mildren and Rousseau [2009] JRC 024.

AG-v-De Carteret [2009] JRC 242.

AG-v-Richomme [2006] JRC 068.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JCA 046.