Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - dangerous driving - grave and criminal assault.

[2013]JRC105

Royal Court

(Samedi)

31 May 2013

The Attorney General

-v-

Neil Martin Coleman

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

Age:  44.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant and the victim were formerly in a relationship.  After the relationship was over, he was convicted of two counts of malicious damage in that he spray painted "Lazy liar walk your dog" on the fence outside her property near Gorey (next to the site of the former Drive Inn), and on the property wall.  He also used a scaffolding pole to smash the panels, roof and glass of her car, an Audi A4 Cabriolet worth £14,000, to the extent that it was written off.  On 13^th July, 2012, he was sentenced to a period of community service. 

Despite this conviction they resumed contact, with the victim providing some financial assistance on occasions by paying his rent as he remained unemployed.  At the time of the incident they were again estranged and had not met since November 2012, although they had sent text messages to one another. 

There was also an exchange of accusations that each had damaged the other's car.  In neither case was there evidence to support such claims.  Following a visit by the police, the victim contacted the defendant and asked why he had made the allegation as it was nothing to do with her.  She said that he became angry and began shouting and swearing at her, at which point she hung up. 

On the morning if Sunday 27^th January, 2013, the defendant went to Fitness First gym at the Waterfront, leaving at 10:08am.  From there he took a meandering route to Maufant and St Martins and turned towards Gorey, when the crash took place. 

The victim was in a red Fiat travelling towards St Martin's Church, where she intended to attend the 10:30am service.  She saw the Fiesta driven by the defendant and that from a car's length away he was looking at her, looked angry and appeared to be shouting.  She saw him turn his vehicle towards hers, crossing the white lines.  She tried to steer away but he impacted the front driver's side, shunting her car towards the wall. 

Pictures taken at the scene show that this was not a glancing blow but one which effectively stopped both vehicles in their tracks.  Both cars were written off. 

In interview the defendant maintained that he had sneezed several times while driving that morning due to a heavy cold.  On this occasion the sneeze caused him to momentarily lose control of his vehicle, crossing the white line and impacting the Fiat entirely accidentally.  He said that he only realised his former partner was driving the Fiat after the impact. 

The victim suffered various abrasions and injuries to her knees.  She reports being concerned as to what will happen when the defendant is released and has considered leaving the Island.  She said "I wonder how far he will go next time."

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.

Previous Convictions:

Malicious damage to the same victim's car and home.

Conclusions:

Total: 2½ years' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for a period of 4 years.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

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

Advocate P. S. Landick for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are here to be sentenced on two charges, a charge of dangerous driving and a charge of grave and criminal assault.  The charges arise out of the same facts.  You were driving along the Grande Route de Faldouet towards Gorey.  The victim was driving on the same road on her way to St Martins Church; it seems right to assume that you might have been expecting to see her on that road at that time.  Without warning you drove your car into hers.  The Court sentences you on the basis that you did so deliberately, although you may not have anticipated the extent of the damage caused as a result.  Equally we approach the case on the basis that you did not intend to hurt her but that you were reckless as to whether you did.  That recklessness is apparent from the mere fact of driving your car, at some speed, into hers.  The consequences for your victim could have been much worse and it is no thanks to you that they were not. 

2.        You were not accurate in your statements to the police and there is an unfortunate resonance of your feelings towards the victim in some of the references given to us and in part of the mitigation, which we have heard, that somehow or other, this is all partly her fault.  We do not see it that way at all.  You have allowed your emotions to govern you and, unfortunately, lost control.  The car is a useful piece of machinery but it is capable of being used as a dangerous weapon.  You used your car impulsively and as a weapon.  On the last occasion, with regard to the same victim, you used a crowbar or a scaffolding pole on her motor vehicle impulsively.  You have shown a seriously destructive inability to control your temper and you should consider how you should get help for that. 

3.        We are going to grant the Crown's conclusions and you are sentenced to 1 year's imprisonment on Count 1 and 2½ years' imprisonment on Count 2, and they will run concurrently, making a total of 2½ years' imprisonment.  We have given thought to the question of disqualification; we think a 4 year disqualification, which really amounts to some 2 years and 4 months' after your release, is appropriate and of course you will have to re-take a test later on. 

4.        We decline to make a Compensation Order.  First of all the claim arrives too late and it cannot be audited and checked, but in any event, you have shown no obvious ability to pay and to add a custodial sentence for non-payment would simply be to increase the sentence, so we are not going to make a Compensation Order and that is a matter for the civil courts if your victim should think it is necessary. 

Authorities

AG-v-Kelly 2000/231.

AG-v-Prior 2001/156.

Gaspar-v-AG [2007] JRC 064.

De la Haye-v-AG [2010] JLR 218.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JCA 046.