Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - grave and criminal assault.

[2013]JRC092A

Royal Court

(Samedi)

15 May 2013

The Attorney General

-v-

Dean Porter

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charge:

Age:  24.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

In the late hours of Friday 21^st December, 2012, the defendant and the victim were at Mimosa Nightclub.  They were not together.  The victim was standing with his back to the bar drinking from a bottle.  The defendants was standing some two metres away from the victim, talking with friends and drinking from a stemmed glass.  Without any apparent reason, the victim walked over to where the defendant was, approached him from behind, lifted him from the ground, and carried him several metres away from the group he was with.  The defendant remained passive and appeared surprised at the victim's behaviour.  The defendant then began to turn away but the victim tapped him on the arm and then began to point and gesticulate towards him.  The victim punched the defendant to the face, knocking him backwards (for this, the victim was subsequently convicted of common assault and being disorderly on licensed premises at the Magistrate's Court).  The defendant transferred his glass to his right hand and swung his left arm to punch the victim.  The victim swerved to avoid this and the punch did not land, but the defendant then threw his right arm towards the victim.  The defendant was still holding his glass in his right hand and this made contact with the left side of the victim's face.  A witness who appears to have only seen the glassing described the movement of the defendant's arm as more of a slap as opposed to a punch.  The victim did not appear to realise that he had been injured for some time afterwards, by which time the defendant had walked away from the area.  Outside the nightclub the defendant was arrested and whilst being placed in a police vehicle said:- "I cut my hand because I glassed someone in the face."  He was conveyed to Police Headquarters and during the booking in procedure there said:- "He deserved it."

When interviewed he said the victim had called him a "fag" for drinking a cocktail.  He said that when he punched out, he had no intention of glassing the victim and thought that his drinking glass was made out of plastic.  He described his own behaviour as vulgar and sickening and expressed his remorse.  He appreciated that the consequences for the victim could have been serious.  As it was he sustained cuts to his cheek and forehead which will leave permanent scars. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea; remorse; provocation by victim; good working record; supportive family. 

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

R. C. P. Pedley, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are here to be sentenced on a count of grave and criminal assault where the circumstances were that, despite some provocation on the part of the victim, you swung your arm to punch him and in your hand you were holding a glass, which made contact with the victim's face, and caused him some serious injuries.  This, which is colloquially known as "glassing", is a serious offence and the Court nearly always sends people to prison for it, particularly if alcohol is a feature and particularly where the offence takes place in a public place. 

2.        We are not going to send you to prison on this occasion.  We accept that the victim in this case was responsible for initiating the whole incident and that puts it in a different category to many of those that this Court has to deal with.  We also accept that this was not a deliberate case of glassing on your part and, indeed, we have looked at the case which your counsel has produced of AG-v-Holmes and Parry 2001/83 and the Court there said:-

"...this was not a conventional glassing; this was in effect a punch where you happened to have a glass in your hand".

Well that was an instinctive reaction in that case and we think it was an instinctive reaction in your case.  Nonetheless, it was the wrong instinct and you, no doubt, will have learned substantially from the way you reacted on that occasion. 

3.        Having regard to everything which your counsel has said, we think the Crown's conclusions are correct and you are sentenced to 120 hours' Community Service, which is the equivalent to 6 months' imprisonment. 

4.        I should warn you that if you do not perform the community service as directed by the community service manager, then you are liable to be brought back before this Court and you can be sentenced afresh for the offence which you have committed.

5.        We are not going to impose a Probation Order because it is not recommended as being necessary in the light of your absence of previous convictions, and we are not going to impose any Exclusion Order, again because we are not satisfied that it is necessary to do so. 

Authorities

AG-v-Holmes and Parry 2001/83.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

AG-v-Saville [2007] JRC 110.

AG-v-Saldana [2009] JRC 032.

AG-v-Rodrigues [2007] JRC 185.