Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - grave and criminal assault.

[2013]JRC116

Royal Court

(Samedi)

18 June 2013

The Attorney General

-v-

Thomas Derek Mawer

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

Age:  33.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Intoxicated, with knife drawn, the defendant ran towards the victim, stabbing him twice as the victim defended himself.  Deep wound on the arm requiring three stitches; glancing blow to the victim's back.  Committed less than three weeks after being sentenced to probation for personal possession of drugs.  Apparently mistook entirely innocent victim for a man whom he claimed had attacked him earlier that evening and/or owed him money. 

Details of Mitigation:

No lasting physical or psychological injury to victim.  Guilty plea after initial denials.  Support of family and of a charitable institution for which he carried out valuable work with the vulnerable. 

Previous Convictions:

Bad record of drugs abuse.  No previous convictions for violence. 

Conclusions:

Magistrate's Court Probation Order to be discharged and no separate penalty sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

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

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

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are to be sentenced on one charge of grave and criminal assault, to which you have pleaded guilty, albeit that on the first of two occasions when you had the opportunity to admit your guilt, one on the 8th December, and the other, after DNA tests had been carried out, on the 12th February, you passed up the opportunity to do so.  You have, however, expressed remorse in a very good letter which has been put before the Court.  The circumstances of the assault were that in the early hours of the morning last November, the victim and his girlfriend were walking along the road, near the Police Station, you approached them.  According to the victim's girlfriend you came flying towards them.  You said "I'm looking for Bree, I want my £400 off him" and you struggled with the victim and slashed at him with a knife.  You struck him twice, causing injuries, one of them a deep wound to the left arm.  This required three stitches, to hold the edges of the wound together.

2.        The Court has said on a number of occasions that knife crime is always serious and in the vast majority of cases the Court deals with them by imposing a custodial sentence.  The Crown has moved conclusions of 4 years' imprisonment and in mitigation, Advocate Bell refers the Court to other cases, AG-v-Barton [2007] JRC 140 and AG-v-Baglin [2005] JRC 030 where starting points have been taken which might suggest that the Crown's conclusions in this case were too high. 

3.        The Court considers that the conclusions are correct and should be granted.  I will now explain why we reach that view.  This was an unprovoked assault on the streets of St. Helier late at night.  There was an element of premeditation in that you were out with a knife and the Court wishes to mark its disapproval of that conduct, of itself.  Indeed we note what the Court said in the case of AG-v-Lawlor [2009] JRC 150. We have taken note of the various cases to which we referred and to the extract from Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey and we also noted the case of AG-v-Farnon [2009] JRC 127.  But each case turns on its own facts and some of the cases in Whelan are now quite old.  The Courts in England recently have made it clear that Courts must respond to changing situations and to the risk of increasing knife violence.  We are fortunate in Jersey that, so far, we are not facing the sort of problems which many areas of England face in relation to the use of knives.  The Court takes a very serious view of any assault with a knife.  The gravity of injury when a knife is used is so often a matter of a chance and there is always a risk of really serious injury, if not worse.  The Court is determined to send out a message that those who resort to attacks with a knife will face severe sentences. 

4.        In this case it is true that the injuries which were sustained by the victim were less serious than those sustained by Mr Baglin's victim, but the Court considers, nonetheless, that that was more luck than judgement. 

5.        We have taken into account, of course, your guilty plea.  We have taken into account the references which you have provided, and the work which you have done with Sanctuary House, all of which go to your credit.  And indeed, when you go into prison, we want you to note that we accept that this offence was out of character.  However, none of that can reduce the seriousness of the offence which you have committed and you are being sentenced for that offence. 

6.        In the relation to the case of Barton we think that he was perhaps fortunate in his sentence, but there was an element there of victims following him into the next street and an element of provocation and active participation by them, which does not apply in the instant case, which was as I have said, a case of an unprovoked assault on the streets.  Also we note that Barton was a case in 2007 and the Court has frequently emphasised since then that knife crime will be dealt with severely. 

7.        In those circumstances, notwithstanding all that your counsel has said, we sentence you on this Indictment to a term of 4 years' imprisonment. 

8.        Magistrate's Court Probation Order to be discharged. 

Authorities

AG-v-Barton [2007] JRC 140.

AG-v-Baglin [2005] JRC 030.

AG-v-Lawor [2009] JRC 150.

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

AG-v-Farnon [2009] JRC 127.

AG-v-Harrison [2004] JLR 111.

AG-v-Hare [2008] JRC 168.

AG-v-Slater [2011] JRC 107.