Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - assault.

[2014]JRC062

Royal Court

(Samedi)

7 March 2014

The Attorney General

-v-

Scott Leonard Charles Furlong

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

Age:  29.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant and half-brother had long running and outstanding history of animosity towards each other.  On 22^nd October, 2013 they had been drinking since late afternoon together at flat of defendant's girlfriend.  Both intoxicated.  Argument developed and defendant grabbed half-brother in a head-lock.  Witness described the half-brother as going a "funny colour" in the face and had blood in the mouth.  Defendant admitted having half-brother's Adam's apple in the crook of his arm and letting go once he had started choking.  Alleged that half-brother had then assaulted him using a knife but declined to make any statement.  Half-brother declined to make any statement against the defendant.  True facts of the incident unclear due to the lack of co-operation of all involved (Count 1). 

Police attended and in the presence of Police Officers the defendant struck half-brother with two punches to the face. (Count 2). 

Breach of Probation arose out of an incident in which the defendant had assaulted his sister and then smashed a mirror and other household items belonging to the sister.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown

Guilty pleas entered on Indictment.  Did not have benefit of youth or good character.  Experienced a very difficult childhood.  Non-compliance with Community-based sentences in the past.  Assessed at high risk of re-conviction and high risk of harm to the public through further violent offending.

The Defence

Emphasised long-outstanding dispute between half-brothers.  Previous incidents of violence but the defendant had chosen not to complain about them.  No serious injuries sustained by victim.  Poor record. Stated intention to leave Island upon release.  Brothers as bad as each other.

Previous Convictions:

22 convictions for 126 offences including grave and criminal assault x 4; common assault; malicious damage; possession of controlled drugs; breaking and entry; larceny; receiving stolen goods and motoring offences, including reckless or dangerous driving, no insurance et cetera.

Conclusions:

Breach of Probation Order: 2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive to current Indictment.  Probation Order discharged.

Total: 12 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

To be sentenced for two common assaults on half-brother.  The more serious of the two counts was the holding of half-brother in a head-lock until he started choking.  Allegation of half-brother committing a serious assault with knife on the defendant.  However defendant refused to make statement and declined to assist in the Police investigation.  In breach of Probation in consequence of guilty pleas.  Had bad record.  High risk of re-conviction and high risk of harm to public.  Was not prepared to undertake Probation/Community Service Orders.  In terms of mitigation the Court had noted guilty plea and the very difficult childhood.  Had reasonable insight to repeated abuse of alcohol and had expressed desire to make life changes.  Court agreed with Defence counsel that both brothers were as bad as each other.

Breach of Probation Order: 2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive to current Indictment.  Probation Order discharged.

Total: 7 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment.

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. M. Grace for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        The defendant stands to be sentenced for two common assaults committed on his half-brother when he and, we think, his half-brother were heavily intoxicated.  The assaults appear to have been committed as part of a long running family dispute between the two half-brothers.  The more serious of the assaults involved the defendant grabbing his half-brother in a headlock until he was chocking.  The assault was committed in close proximity to the defendant's heavily pregnant girlfriend.  It would seem that following this incident the defendant was himself assaulted by his half-brother who put a knife to his neck and from which he sustained a nasty, what appears to be, knife wound to his neck which required three stitches.  However the defendant has refused to make a statement against his half-brother and declined to assist the police with their investigation, as indeed has his girlfriend.

2.        These offences were committed in breach of a probation order imposed on 18^th June, 2013 for an offence of malicious damage for which the defendant also stands to be sentenced. 

3.        The defendant has a bad record, many for violence.  He has twice been imprisoned for 3 years for grave and criminal assaults.  He is assessed at a high risk of reconviction and as posing a high risk of harm to the public.  The defendant will not consent to probation or community orders and intends to leave the Island on his release, we are informed by Miss Grace, in order to get employment in England and to sort out his many issues, and also to provide financial support to his new child. 

4.        The Crown puts the first assault at the upper end of the range for common assaults and in the circumstances seeks 12 months' imprisonment, concurrent for the two assaults, and 2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive, for the malicious damage.  Making a total of 12 months and 2 weeks.

5.        In terms of mitigation the defendant has pleaded guilty.  He has, as the Crown said, clearly had a very difficult childhood.  He has always been considered academically capable and when in work has a good work ethic.  In his interview with the psychologist he did reveal insight into the repeated nature of his alcohol abuse and assaultative behaviour and of the risk of this continuing until he decides to make life changes, which Miss Grace tells us he is now intent upon doing.  As we said earlier both the defendant and his half-brother were intoxicated and none of the witnesses have really assisted the police.  There is, accordingly, a lack of clarity as to what actually took place but we agree with Miss Grace that the two half-brothers are as bad as each other. 

6.        The defendant is, however, to be sentenced to common assaults which ordinarily would be dealt with in the Magistrate's Court.  The fact is that there was no evidence of haemorrhaging of the eyes normally associated with asphyxiation and the defendant did let his half-brother go once he started to choke.  He is, as Miss Grace says, to be punished for what he did and not what he might have done.  We think that a custodial sentence is inevitable, as Miss Grace has conceded, but in our view 7 months properly reflects the criminality here.  We also agree that the sentence for the malicious damage should be consecutive.

7.        On Count 1 you are sentenced to 7 months' imprisonment, on Count 2 you are sentenced to 2 months' imprisonment, concurrent, that makes a total of 7 months' imprisonment under the Indictment.  In terms of the breach of the Probation Order, we discharge that order and in its place impose a sentence of 2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive to the sentence on the Indictment.  That makes a total sentence of 7 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment.

Authorities

AG-v-Furlong [2007] JRC 060.

AG-v-Furlong [2009] JRC 149.

AG-v-Smale [2011] JRC 156A.

AG-v-Smale [2013] JRC 176.