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 >> The Attorney General v Julie Ann Harrigan [2021] JRC 288 (15 November 2021)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2021/2021_288.html
Cite as: [2021] JRC 288
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - Fraudulent Conversion
|
Before : |
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ramsden and Christensen, MBE. |
The Attorney General
-v-
Julie Ann Harrigan
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charge:
|
1 count of: |
Fraudulent Conversion (Count 1). |
Age: 36
Plea: Guilty
Details of Offence:
At the time of the offending the Defendant was an Ecrivain working at a Jersey Law firm and was leading the Wills and Estates Teams. Following suspicious activity in relation to an estate managed by the Defendant the Defendant was dismissed by her employer and a full review of the Defendant's files were conducted.
In July 2015 the Defendant became curator for Ms A. The investigation revealed over a two-year period (October 2015 to September 2017) the Defendant had made 46 transfers from two bank accounts of the curatorship of Ms A into the bank account her salary was paid into. The transfers were made via her online mobile banking application. The Defendant transferred a total of £29,350 (£24,600 from one account, and £4,750 from another). The Defendant made numerous transactions between the curatorship accounts to ensure the balances were sufficient to fund the transfers to her personal account.
The Defendant directed for a transfer of £18,367.32 from the estate of B to be paid to a charity and for the payment to be made by the faster payment process at a £1 charge in accordance with the will of B. The bank account details of the payment form were for one of the curatorship accounts of Ms A. The sum of £18,366.32 was transferred into Ms A's account guised as a payment to the JSPCA.
The Defendant used the money for day-to-day expenses and to support her lifestyle.
Following the investigation, the Law Firm paid £28,250 into Ms A's account and transferred the £18,366.32 back from A's accounts to B's estate.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea, remorse, good character, and the Defendant returned to the Island voluntarily to answer the Indictment.
Previous Convictions:
None
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
3 years and 9 months' imprisonment. |
Compensation order sought in the sum of £28,500 with 6 months to pay or 18 months' imprisonment in default.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
3 years' imprisonment. |
Compensation order made in the sum of £28,500 with 6 months to pay or 12 months' imprisonment in default.
M R. Maletroit Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate R. C. L. Morley-Kirk for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. Julie Harrigan you are 36 years old and have no previous convictions. These events occurred when you were working as a trusted employee of Collas Crill. You first began working for that law firm in 2008, when you were aged 23. You were sworn in as an Ecrivain of this Court in December 2014 and when you were sworn in, you would have taken an oath, as all Advocates and Solicitors do, to well and faithfully, discharge your duties.
2. You were promoted to Associate at the law firm where you worked in January 2015 and awarded the title Junior Lawyer of the Year in 2016. When you committed this offence between October 2015 and September 2017 you were head of the Wills and Estates team in your firm. You were appointed by the examination board as an examiner for the Jersey Wills and Succession Paper, such was the extent of your expertise.
3. You were dismissed by your employer in January 2018 for matters unconnected with this offence, but your criminal conduct was discovered after an internal investigation that took place at that time. As to that conduct, in relation to a 76 year old women who was unable to look after her affairs, you were appointed by the Court to act as her Curator in July 2015, and when you were appointed you, like all curators, took a special oath to manage her affairs to a high standard.
4. You did not do so, you failed to file annual accounts for that curatorship for the periods ending July 2015, July 2016 and July 2017. Further and more importantly, between October 2015 and September 2017, you made 46 transfers from the bank accounts of the lady for whom you were, in effect, trustee to your personal bank accounts. The total sum involved was £29,350.00 and you were 30 years old when you began this offending.
5. You used this money to support yourself and you had no need to obtain these funds in this way as you were earning approximately £60,000 per year during this period. You made numerous transfers between the interdict's, (that is the term for the lady under curatorship) bank accounts to ensure that the balances were sufficient to fund transfers to your own account. Furthermore, in order to supplement the balances in this lady's accounts you dishonestly misappropriated other funds belonging to another client of a firm who had died and bequeathed the residue of her moveable estate to a number of charities, which included the JSPCA and which was entitled to receive £18,367.32.
6. Collas Crill had been instructed to act as Executors of the estate of this woman and on the 18th August 2017, you completed an internal client payment form requesting that this sum be paid not to the JSPCA, but to the account of the 76-year-old lady, in order cover up your offending.
7. When your dishonesty was then identified your employers took steps to ensure that the JSPCA received their funds and that the accounts of the 76 year old lady were restored to the proper balance.
8. We have had regard to the questions set out in the case of R v Barrick (1985) 7 CR. App. R (S) 142 relevant to sentence in breach of trust cases. We find as follows:-
(i) This was a breach of trust by an officer of the Royal Court. You swore an oath of office as Ecrivain when you were sworn in and swore a specific oath before a judge of the Royal Court when you were appointed as a Curator. The Court places the very highest degree of trust in a Curator to manage the estate of another person who is by definition vulnerable and unable to look after their own affairs. As an officer of the Court you have betrayed the trust placed in you by your employer, by the Court, by the public and by fellow members of the legal profession. We agree with the Crown, that it is difficult to envisage a more serious breach of trust.
(ii) The offending took place over a two year period involving 46 transfers, ceasing shortly before your dismissal.
(iii) It is unclear to what use the funds were put beyond funding your day to day living expenses.
(iv) As to the effect of on the victim, the funds were repaid by Collas Crill and neither the 76 year old lady or the estate of the woman who left monies to charity had suffered a loss, although that was no thanks to you.
(v) As to the effect on the public and public confidence, members of the public expect Jersey lawyers to act with the highest integrity and in accordance with their oaths, duties and the law.
(vi) As to the effect on your colleagues and partners, the law firm sustained loss and has made an application for compensation.
(vii) As to the effect on you, you have lost your good name, your good character and your career as a Jersey lawyer.
9. Finally, as the mitigation special to you, as we have said you have no previous convictions and this case has been personally disastrous for you. We have read with care the Social Enquiry Report. the report of Dr Ruth Emsley and the evidence of your family and friends, including people with whom you have worked at Collas Crill who speak so highly of you. We are at a loss to understand why you offended in this way.
10. Your letter of remorse to the Court describes your behaviour as despicable and we note the apologies you make to Collas Crill and the client who was affected by your Curatorship and the beneficiaries of the estate that was affected. We note that you have apologised to the profession as whole, and to the members of the Royal Court. The Probation Officer regards your expressions of remorse as being genuine.
11. We note that there were difficulties in your marriage and difficulties at work which contributed to your conduct, but we note that you do not claim that these provide any excuse for what you did. You have rightly said there is no reason or excuse to justify this behaviour.
12. Your family in their references speak of you having a good childhood brought up by a loving family with a strong moral code. They say that you have worked hard and not only tarnished your own reputation but thrown away a career you worked so hard to secure.
13. We accept this behaviour was entirely out of character and there is no prospect to its repetition. You returned from Ireland voluntarily to face these proceedings for which you are also given credit. Since this offending, whilst in Ireland, you have worked hard, and we have read the reference from your current employer in County Donegal. We know that there you work in a managerial position and are held in high regard by everyone with whom you work. In addition to the hard work that you have done since your dismissal from Collas Crill you have also completed a foundation degree in counselling and have been offered a place on a Masters programme which you accept you will be unable to commence in view of the sentence we are about to impose, but we hope that you are able to do so on your release.
14. We are invited to make and we do make a compensation order in sum of £28,250.00 which you can meet by using a small pension available to you, which is to your credit and we make that order and require you to pay that period within six months of today and we fix a sentence of 12 months' in default in the event of you failing to do so.
15. You accept and we find this offending is so serious that only a custodial sentence can be justified and the least sentence we can impose and do impose is one of 3 years' imprisonment.
Authorities
R v Barrick (1985) 7 Cr.App.R. (S.) 142
Criminal Justice (Compensation orders) (Jersey) Law 1994
AG v Michel [2011] JRC093