Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - Grave and criminal assault.

[2020]JRC233

Royal Court

(Samedi)

6 November 2020

Before     :

T. J. Le Cocq, Esq., Bailiff, and Jurats Thomas and Pitman

The Attorney General

-v-

Alexander Rodney Buesnel

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

1 count of:

Grave and Criminal Assault (Count 1).

Age:  22.

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

In the early hours of 14^th December, 2019, at the outside smoking area of The Watersplash nightclub, the defendant bit the face of the complainant, causing injuries.

 

The complainant and defendant were unknown to each other.  An altercation occurred between the defendant and a member of the complainant's group of friends inside the nightclub: not witnessed by the complainant.  Outside in the smoking area, the defendant confronted the same male and pushed him.  The complainant's girlfriend intervened and was also pushed by the defendant.  This was seen by the complainant who went to assist her.  He grabbed the defendant from behind and put him into a headlock.  The two males fell to the ground with the defendant on top of the complainant.  The Crown accepted the defendant's factual basis that he was assaulted whilst on top of the complainant by other unknown persons; he sustained a swollen right eye, swollen lip, a graze and boot mark on the face.  The complainant was not responsible for these injuries.  The defendant did not seek medical treatment for these injuries.

 

The defendant bit the complainant on the left cheek causing laceration.  The complainant also received a jagged laceration to the side of his nose:  The defendant denied that he had bitten twice but accepted this second injury caused to the complainant during the course of the struggle.  A member of door staff saw the bite, intervened and ejected the defendant.  The complainant received a number of a threatening messages from a female unknown to him but who was with the defendant.  It is unclear whether the messages were sent by or on behalf of defendant.  The complainant was put in fear of meeting the defendant and was anxious regarding the trial.

 

The incident was reported to the police by the complainant 3 days later.  Seen by FME: injury consistent with a bite.

 

The defendant attended police station for interview: "no comment" to all relevant questions: denied the allegation.

 

The defendant pleaded not guilty but following change in Defence counsel, 3 working days before trial, guilty plea on factual basis offered and accepted.  The biting was an overreaction and he was not acting in reasonable self-defence.

 

The Crown applied the Harrison factors to the facts of the case.  The complainant was left with permanent minor scarring and suffered from anxiety.  The Crown took a starting point of 2 years' imprisonment.

 

No exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from Court's stated policy that assaults involving biting treated very seriously and normally resulted in sentence of imprisonment.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown

Guilty plea very late in the day.  Very little personal mitigation.  Had a criminal record but not for offences of similar nature although had Parish Hall appearances re violence.  Defendant had been confrontational in the past.  Regret/remorse tainted by his lack of coherent thinking.  Moderate risk of re-conviction.

 

The Defence

Aged 21 at time of offence.  Out of character: references provided.  Reacted to the assault upon him whilst on ground but accepted he acted beyond reasonable self-defence in biting.  He was deeply sorry.  Not a deep thinker/immature.  Custody not inevitable: deal with by way of CSO/Probation.

Previous Convictions:

3 Court appearances for offences of possession of drugs, driving without due care, speeding and other minor motoring offences

Conclusions:

Count 1:

18 months' imprisonment.

Compensation order sought in the sum of £1,500.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

12 months' imprisonment.

Compensation order made in the sum of £1,500, to be paid within 30 days or 3 months' imprisonment, consecutive, in default.

J. C. Gollop Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate D. S. Steenson for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        You are to be sentenced today for one count of grave and criminal assault committed on a male victim whilst you were both at The Watersplash, La Grande Route des Mielles.  The Crown has set out the facts sufficiently and we do not need to repeat them in these remarks.  In summary however, following an altercation within The Watersplash you followed your victim's friend and the victim's girlfriend into the smoking area outside where you pushed them both.  In response to that your victim then sought to intervene grabbing you around the neck, pulling you from his girlfriend and a tussle ensued where you fell to the ground and you inflicted the injury that we have heard about on the victim.  During the course of this you sustained injuries yourself and other persons unknown inflicted them on you, but that is not a matter for which the victim in this case can be held the slightest responsible. 

2.        You are of course entitled to act in reasonable self defence but this assault on your part which involved biting has given rise to permanent, though minor, scarring on your victim and it went, as you rightly through counsel accept, far beyond what was reasonable in all of the circumstances of the case. 

3.        We agree with the Crown's characterisation of this matter against the various factors set out in the case of Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111.  Taking into account of course the submissions made by your counsel in that regard, and we note of course that the offence of biting is treated by the Court as a very serious matter and, save in exceptional circumstances, results in a custodial sentence.  That policy was set out in the case of AG v Housley [2014] JRC 084 where the Court said:

"...the Court has said on more than one occasion that assaults which involve biting are treated very seriously and the reason is that it is impossible to predict the gravity of the injuries."

4.        You are not of previous good character but your record is not an extensive one and you have no convictions for relevant offences of violence.  However, the Social Enquiry Report to which we have paid careful regard notes that you are at moderate risk of reconviction and that there is an upward trajectory in terms of seriousness of your offending.  We also note, again with concern that it suggests that you are reluctant to take full responsibility and you downplay the adverse affect of alcohol consumption on your behaviour, although we have of course read your letter which we take to be genuine.  We have also read the victim's statement.  This was an unpleasant and almost feral assault and we well understand the effect that it must have had on him. 

5.        You are entitled to some benefit for your guilty plea although it was late in the day and did not therefore avoid completely the anxiety to your victim at the prospect of having to give evidence before the Court.  We note the basis of plea of which the Crown accepts and we proceed accordingly.  In addition to your guilty plea, to which we have given we think appropriate allowance, we note the character references and letters sent on your behalf which point to a very different character than the offending and your previous convictions might suggest.

6.        The policy of the Court, however, is clear and we cannot in our judgment find exceptional circumstances and therefore we cannot avoid a custodial sentence.  However, we do feel able to reduce significantly the Conclusions moved for by the Crown in the light of all the available mitigation and you are sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.

7.        We make an order for compensation as moved for by the Crown, payable within 30 days with a 3 month consecutive default sentence in the event of non-payment.

Authorities

Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111. 

AG v Housley [2014] JRC 084. 

AG v Alfonso [2013] JRC 190. 

AG v Cox [2014] JRC 115. 

Article 2 Criminal Justice (Compensation Orders) (Jersey) Law 1994.

Sentencing Guidelines Council: Magistrate's Court Sentencing Guidelines re physical and mental injuries 2020