Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - assault - grave and criminal assault.

[2021]JRC102

Royal Court

(Samedi)

9 April 2021

Before     :

R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Crill and Hughes.

The Attorney General

-v-

Sacha Olivia Butlin

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

3 counts of:	Assault (Counts 1, 2 and 3).
1 count of:	Grave and Criminal assault (Count 4).

Age:  23. 

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

In the early hours of 8^th March 2020 inside the Vittoria nightclub the defendant assaulted 3 complainants.  The assaults were all captured on CCTV and the footage was shown to the Sentencing Court. 

 

Count 1:  The defendant and the first complainant are known to each other.  The defendant kicks out at the complainant getting her attention.  As the first complainant turns and approaches, the defendant slaps her to the face and swears at her.  No injury sustained.  Shocked and scared of the defendant. 

 

Count 2:  The second complainant being the boyfriend of the first complainant steps forward between the defendant and his girlfriend and takes hold of the defendant pushing her away.  The defendant then slaps the face of the second complainant.  The defendant shouting in an intense and aggressive manner. 

 

The first and second complainants exit the premises for a short period of time.  The defendant also exits. 

 

The first and second complainants re-enter the premises with the third complainant, a female friend of the first complainant.  They all head towards the dance floor of the premises.  The defendant in company of female friend re-enters the premises and also heads towards the dance floor.  Both females are holding glasses in their hands. 

 

The defendant approaches the complainants on the dance floor.  The third complainant steps forward and taps the defendant on the shoulder so as to enquire what she is doing.  Without provocation the defendant punches the third complainant to the face causing her nose to bleed (Count 3).

 

Count 4:  The second complainant steps forward to intervene and to separate the parties and the defendant strikes him to the face with her left hand in which she is holding glass.  The glass shatters on impact.  His vision goes blurry and his face is bleeding.  The defendant is pulled away by a male and the defendant and her female friend seek to leave the premises.  Door staff come to the assistance of the second complainant and ambulance and police are requested to attend. 

 

Door staff at main exit to premises prevent the defendant from leaving the premises.  The police attend and arrest the defendant who states: "I didn't do anything".  It is noted she has blood on both of her hands and a small cut on left palm and also a cut to her right hand. 

 

The second and third complainants are taken to hospital.  The second complainant has three deep incised wounds above and through his left eyebrow.  Wounds require a total of 9 sutures.  Also has other superficial lacerations which are superglued.  Injuries consistent with being struck in the face with a glass.  Left with scarring.  The third complainant did not require any specific medical treatment.  No deformity to the nose. 

 

The defendant interviewed under caution on three occasions: answered 'no comment' to all questions. 

 

Guilty plea to Count 1 but not guilty pleas entered to Counts 2, 3 and 4.  Guilty pleas entered five working days before trial.  Guilty plea to Count 4 entered on a factual basis accepted by the Crown: she did not appreciate she had glass in hand when struck the second complainant to the face: therefore, acted recklessly. 

 

The Crown applied the Harrison factors to the facts of the case.  The second complainant was left with permanent scarring and suffered from anxiety.  All three complainants provided Victim Personal statements seeking a Restraining Order against the Defendant.  Offences had adversely impacted on all three complainants.  The defendant was at all times the aggressor.  Offences aggravated by her drinking half a bottle of vodka.

 

The Crown took a starting point of 2 years' imprisonment on Count 4. 

 

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

 

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown

Guilty plea very late in the day.  Limited credit for late pleas and also for residual youth: aged 22 at time of offences.  Not of good character but no previous for violence.  Positive character references provided.  Expressed remorse to author of Social Enquiry Report: she acknowledged that her actions were unjustified, disproportionate and reckless. 

 

The Defence

Critical of Victim Personal Statement: suggested complainants had exaggerated. Should be entitled to full credit for pleas as trial avoided. Count 4; acted recklessly: thought was going to be attacked by Second Complainant. Content to comply with any orders so as to avoid custody. Youth, good character, strong work record. Suitable for non-custodial sentence.

Previous Convictions:

Taking and driving away a motor vehicle and no insurance.  

Conclusions:

Crown seeks

Count 1:	1 month's imprisonment;
Count 2:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent;
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment, concurrent;
Count 4:	18 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  18 months' imprisonment. 

Exclusion Order sought from Licensed Premises for a period of 12 months from date of release from prison: excluded from 1^st, 2^nd, 4^th, 5^th and 7^th category licences subject to usual exceptions. 

Restraining Order sought in favour of the three complainants preventing the defendant having any contact with them for a period of 5 years.  

Compensation Order in the total sum of £3,324.17 sought for the second complainant.  The Order seeks compensation for:

(a)   The sum of £ 1,574.17 for replacement of blood-stained clothing and medical expenses.

(b)   The sum of £1,750 for scarring and anxiety.

Compensation Order in the sum of £140 sought for the third complainant:  The Order seeks compensation for the replacement of blood-stained trousers. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	50 hours Community Service Order, equivalent to 1 month's imprisonment.
Count 2:	50 hours Community Service Order, equivalent to 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	70 hours Community Service Order, equivalent to 2 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	240 hours Community Service Order, equivalent to 18 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 240 hours Community Service Order.

No Probation Order.

Compensation Order in the sum of £3,000 for Complainant 2. 

Compensation Order in the sum of £140 for Complainant 3.

Compensation Orders to be paid at £100 per week or 3 months' imprisonment in default.

Restraining Order 5 years from today.

Exclusion Order 12 months from today.

Costs Order in the sum of £1,000 (£100 per week once compensation paid) 

J. C. Gollop Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate D. S. Steenson for the Defendant

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are 23 years old and have no relevant previous convictions and you are for to be sentenced today for a serious offence, assaulting another young person when you were holding a glass at a nightclub on the 8^th March last year.  

2.        In summary, at just after half past midnight in the morning of Sunday 8^th March, you, whilst in the nightclub, kicked a woman you knew and then slapped her in the face, (count 1 on the indictment), then swore at her and as her friend, Mr Durrell who you did not even know, stepped between you and the woman you just slapped, you slapped him the face while shouting, (count 2).  We have seen the footage and both of these incidents were without any provocation that we could see. 

3.        About ten minutes later, you were on the dance floor with a friend.  The same group of people that you had been involved with earlier were also there, and this time you punched a woman in the face causing her nose to bleed (count 3) and when Mr Durrell again attempted to intervene (this is count 4 on the indictment) you hit him with your left hand in which was a glass, which you had forgotten you were holding.  You hit him in the face near his left eye, the glass smashing when it hit him.  Initially his vision was blurry, his face was bleeding and he was conveyed by ambulance to hospital. 

4.        When the police arrived, you lied to them said you did not do anything, in fact you literally you had blood in your hands at the time, from a cut you sustained whilst hitting Mr Durrell.  You were interviewed by the police, you made no comment and, with the exception of the offence at Count 1, you pleaded guilty to the other offences we have mentioned at the eleventh hour - just a few days before you were due to be tried by the Jury.  You could have entered that guilty plea much earlier, and you were quite entitled to do so at any stage. 

5.        Mr Durrell was left with deep wounds above his left eyebrow which required nine stitches.  He could have lost an eye and the scarring is permanent.  The Crown has accepted that you had forgotten that you were holding a glass when you struck Mr Durrell.  We do not regard that as any mitigation.  The reason in our view you forgot that you were holding a glass is you had drunk half a bottle of vodka and were intoxicated.  This is another aggravating feature. 

6.        We note from the witness statements of the three people you assaulted that night, all in their early twenties that they are still in fear of you.  One says that when she sees you now, she feels physically sick, anxious and frightened.  Another says she is not comfortable going out for fear that she may come across you again.  Mr Durrell says that the assault has had a "massive impact" on his life, emotionally physically and practically.  This is partly a consequence of the lateness of your guilty plea.  He is very anxious when going out and is not afraid to say that he remains scared of you. 

7.        All three witnesses invite the Court to impose a Restraining Order preventing you from having any contact with them.  This is something that we will do for a period of five years, as sought by the Crown.

8.        We give you credit for your plea of guilty, late as it was, and you should be in no doubt that had you not pleaded guilty and had been convicted by the Jury after trial, then you would been sentenced, as the Crown submit, to two years immediate imprisonment. 

9.        The Social Enquiry Report reveals that you had a difficult start in life.  Your father died young, your mother left the Island when you small and you have been cared for by siblings and friends.  You have been, it seems, affected by the absence of appropriate parenting as you were growing up.  It was difficult to understand why you behaved in the way that you did assaulting three people, one of whom you struck with your hand when it was holding a glass.  To say you overreacted to the situation does not adequately explain your conduct.  The author of the report says that you exhibit genuine remorse and we are content to accept that from her. 

10.      All people in whatever circumstances who use a glass as a weapon in a public place should expect to receive a custodial sentence absent quite exceptional circumstances.  We have given anxious consideration to your case, as you can tell by the amount of time the Court has been in retirement.  The Jurats were divided, one felt that you should go to prison immediately today and one was just persuaded that there are exceptional circumstances in your case, and those are your youth, you were 22 at the time of this offence, your plea, late though it was, your good character, your remorse and your strong work record.  I should say to you that none of these on their own are exceptional circumstances as they are commonplace, but taken together, in the opinion of one Jurat they just amounted to exceptional circumstances.  I have agreed with that Jurat and accordingly you have avoided custody by the narrowest possible margin today. 

11.      As a direct alternative to custody:

(i)        You will receive 50 hours community service on Count 1, equivalent to one month's imprisonment,

(ii)       50 hours on Count 2, equivalent to one month's imprisonment,

(iii)      70 hours on Count 3, equivalent to two month's imprisonment and;

(iv)      240 hours on Count 4, equivalent to 18 months' imprisonment, all to run concurrently, making a total of 240 hours community service. 

12.      We prohibit you from approaching or contacting directly or indirectly, which includes any posting on social media, your three victims. 

13.      Any breach of this order shall be an offence to which are liable to imprisonment for up to two years, and a fine. 

14.      We exclude you from licenced premises apart from the cinema, airport and ferry for 12 months - so you are banned from clubs and pubs for 12 months.  

15.      We order you to pay Mr Durrell £3,000.00 in compensation at the rate of £100 a month on the account of his personal injury and damaged to his clothing, and £140 to your victim on count 3, making a total of £3,140 in compensation, with a sentence of three months' imprisonment in default. 

16.      We order you to pay £1,000.00 contribution towards the prosecution costs.  The compensation is to be paid first at the rate of £100 per week.  

17.      Do understand Miss Butlin, that if you fail to comply the Community Service Order then you will be brought back to Court and, you will almost certainly face a custodial sentence.  

Authorities

Harrison v AG [2004] JLR 111. 

AG v Viveiros [2014] JRC 162A. 

AG v Cameron [2016] JRC 107. 

AG v Ashcroft [2019] JRC 146.

AG v Healy [2018] JRC 238.

Crime (Disorderly Conduct and Harassment) (Jersey) Law 2008.

Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons) (Jersey) Law 1998.

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

Sentencing Council Sentencing Guidelines:  Compensation..