Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG -v- Goodchild [2016] JRC 128B (22 July 2016)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2016/2016_128B.html
Cite as: [2016] JRC 128B
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - possession - class B - grave and criminal assault.
|
Before : |
T. J. Le Cocq, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Thomas and Ronge |
The Attorney General
-v-
Mark Christopher James McCleod Goodchild
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following guilty pleas to the following charges:
First Indictment
|
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1). |
Second Indictment
|
1 count of: |
Grave and criminal assault (Count 1). |
Age: 30.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
On the evening of 29th August, 2016, the defendant was outside Kitty O'Shea's public house with a couple of friends having a cigarette. The victim and another male approached their group and the male started speaking to one of the defendant's friends. The victim became irate, grabbing the defendant by the neck and punching him to the face. The punch did not cause any injury. The victim then went for the defendant's legs but the defendant grabbed the victim and threw him to the floor. Witnesses described the defendant punching the victim to the face and kicking the victim to the upper body and head whilst he lay motionless on the ground. The victim suffered cuts and bruises and a fracture to his cheekbone which was repaired by insertion of a mini-plate and screw.
The assault was witnessed by a number of people including an elderly couple, a pregnant woman and a 14 year old child. After the defendant had stopped assaulting the victim, he approached a male passer-by and told him not to call the police.
After the assault the defendant left the area and sometime later that evening he went to Havana Nightclub. Whilst there the defendant continued to be aggressive and offensive, his abuse was directed mainly at the Manager of Havana Nightclub.
The Police attended outside Havana Nightclub and the defendant was arrested for disorderly behaviour at Havana Nightclub and taken to Police Headquarters. On arrival the defendant was removed from the van and the contents of his pockets were found on the cage floor. Amongst these items were numerous lumps of brown resinous substance. These were analysed and found to be cannabis resin weighing, in total, 506 milligrams.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea; provocation and personal mitigation.
Previous Convictions:
The defendant has 7 previous convictions for 39 offences, including 3 convictions for common assault between 2012 and 2014 and two convictions for possession of cannabis in 2009 and 2015.
Conclusions:
First Indictment
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 6 weeks' imprisonment. 1 month's imprisonment. |
Second Indictment
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 30 months' imprisonment. 20 months' imprisonment, consecutive to the First Indictment. |
Total: 21 months' imprisonment.
Compensation Order sought in the sum of £1,600 in favour of the victim.
Exclusion Order sought, should the Court impose a Community Service Order as an alternative to an immediate custodial sentence, excluding the defendant from 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 7th category licensed premises excluding the Multiplex Cinema, Jersey Art's Centre, Jersey Airport, the ferry terminal at Elizabeth Harbour and the Opera House for a period of 12 months.
Forfeiture and destruction of the dugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Court took into account the defendant's genuine expression of remorse, his guilty plea, the provocation and his personal mitigation but these factors did not constitute exceptional circumstances. Therefore an immediate custodial sentence was appropriate. The Court however reduced the conclusions of the Crown to take the mitigation into account.
First Indictment
|
Count 1: |
1 month's imprisonment. |
Second Indictment
|
Count 1: |
12 months' imprisonment, consecutive to the First Indictment. |
Total: 13 months' imprisonment.
No Compensation Order made.
No Exclusion Order made.
Forfeiture and destruction of the dugs ordered.
Ms S. J. O'Donnell, Crown Advocate.
Advocate E. L. Burns for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. You are to be sentenced today for one count of a grave and criminal assault and one count of possession of a relatively small amount of cannabis. The assault was a vicious one because you threw your victim to the ground and, whilst he lay motionless, you punched and kicked him in the body and in the head. His injuries were serious and included a fracture of the cheekbone and bruising, swellings and abrasions.
2. We take the view that alcohol played a part in your behaviour. The kicks to the head were dangerous indeed and the injuries could have been much worse. We have read the personal statement of your victim and clearly his injuries have had a real effect on him. You do not have a good record and you have previous convictions for violence and clearly alcohol has played a part and a continuing role in your offending up to now.
3. We accept that you were provoked significantly in this case but your reaction to that provocation went far beyond any legitimate response and was wholly disproportionate.
4. You are entitled to credit for your guilty plea and we have read, with care, the letter that you have provided and we accept that your remorse is genuine.
5. However, the Court's policy is clear and without exceptional circumstances a custodial sentence will follow. The Court said in the case of AG-v-Silva [2015] JRC 153:-
"Those who commit violent assaults on the streets of St Helier will be set to prison unless there are exceptional circumstances."
We have to say that we do not find that there are exceptional circumstances in this case.
6. We do however take the view that there is substantial mitigation available to you and, taking into account that mitigation and I particular that personal mitigation contained in the social enquiry report that we have read, and the element which we view as significant of provocation in this case, we think that we are in a position to reduce the conclusions moved for by the Crown in this matter.
7. Accordingly in connection with the grave and criminal assault you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. It would have been higher but for our view of the significant mitigation available to you and in connection with the cannabis offence you are sentenced to 1 month's imprisonment, to run consecutively, making a total of 13 months' imprisonment.
8. We hope that you will advantage of the facilities and the help available to you in prison and that you will continue the progress that you have made. We hope we do not see you again.
Authorities
Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons)(Jersey) Law 1998.
Criminal Justice (Compensation Orders)(Jersey) Law 1994.
AG-v-Goodchild [2014] JRC 133A.
AG-v-Le Mains 1996/178.
AG-v-Porteous 2001/138.
AG-v-Le Chevere [2015] JRC 053.
Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts 3rd Edition.
English Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012.