Crown Court for Northern Ireland Decisions

Neutral Citation no. [2006] NICC 36
Ref: 2006NICC36
BILL NO: N16/05

IN HER MAJESTY'S COURT OF APPEAL
IN NORTHERN IRELAND

NEWTOWNARDS COURT NO 1
9 MARCH 2006


Before Mr Justice Deeny _________ THE QUEEN v STEPHEN MAGEE _________ Transcript Provided By: Official Court Reporter ________

THE JUDGE: Stephen David Anthony Magee the facts of this matter have been outlined by the Crown Counsel in open court this morning and I do not propose to go into them very extensively. You are here because of the tragic events that took place at Erinvale Terrace, Banbridge, Co Down on 15 July 2004. You went to this house where your former girlfriend lived in the early hours of the morning. You have told those who have interviewed you that you were under the influence of alcohol and cannabis and diazepam but as your Counsel quite rightly accepted, by implication, that does not excuse this in any way but it serves as a warning to every other person tempted or giving way to the abuse of these substances to know the tragic consequences that can follow all too often from such abuse. You pushed your way into this house, perhaps because of something unwisely said by your former girlfriend about the young men who were in that house. You struck Christopher Finnegan with a broomstick, without any provocation. He and one or more friends then pursued you out the back or attempted to pursue you out the back door of the house. You returned into the house. Tragically two of the young men also returned back in to the house as well. I must accept the evidence in this case, that the deceased Christopher Finnegan had picked up a knife in the kitchen of the house and on the weight of the evidence that he did have it with him. But it is clear that, although angry and upset understandably at your assault upon him, he did not strike you; you had initiated the original row, you had armed yourself with a larger and as we know all too well now, lethal knife and though you gestured at one another it was you that struck him and it is upon your head that the guilt of this tragedy lies. There is some confusion about the events but I do have to accept the contention cogently put forward by your Counsel Mr McDonald QC that this was not a case of a deliberate pursuit of somebody with a knife in an unprovoked way. There was a confrontation but it was one that you had initiated without any justification. Christopher Finnegan was only 17 at this time. I note that he had been educated at the Bridge Integrated College at Loughbrickland and that he had just obtained useful employment in Newry. I have read the statements of his two parents, they are very moving documents and I fully accept the great distress to them and the great loss that they have suffered and will continue to suffer. However it is my duty to take into account the factors in your favour as well as the factors against you. In your favour I must take into account that you yourself had an exceptionally difficult upbringing and this is well set out in a number of the documents including the pre-sentencing report from the Probation Service of Northern Ireland. You were effectively abandoned by your father when a young child, your mother had great difficulty coping, you yourself seem to have committed your first offence at the age of 13 and spent much of the intervening period in one Institution after another. You have attempted suicide on occasion. It is clear that you have very little control over your temper, given the number of assaults that you have been involved in. But I take into account that there is nothing in your previous record involving a knife or weapon, it would appear. I take into account the important evidence of the Deputy State Pathologist here. He says that there was a solitary stab wound. It passed through the fleshy part of the left upper arm and the armpit into the left side of the chest cavity of this young man and tragically it severed the aorta, a key blood vessel and his death followed relatively rapidly. I also note that the Pathologist's comment that if the weapon had a sharp tip, which seems likely in the circumstances, it would have required no more than a moderate degree of force to inflict this would. I reject your claims to the police that you flicked this knife at this young man, clearly there was more force than that used, but it was a blow to the arm and it was a blow, apparently, that may not have been of more than moderate force. It seems to me that the Crown were behaving properly in accepting your plea to manslaughter in the light of those facts and in the light of the witness statements which do indicate that Christopher Finnegan had tragically picked up a knife also which he had with him. I take into account in your favour that you are a person of low IQ and maybe less well able to judge some of these situations than other people. I take into account as an important fact that you have pleaded guilty to this charge of manslaughter when the Crown agreed to accept it. The courts do take such matters into account for a number of reasons. Firstly it reduces the stress to the witnesses giving evidence in the trial and the stress to the family of what might have been a relatively prolonged trial. It reduces the possibility, although I think that was a remote one in this case, of you escaping this conviction. It saves the time of the courts so that other matters can be dealt with and it also allows you to indicate a degree of remorse and your Counsel legitimately drew attention to the remorse you had expressed to the police and subsequently to the Consultant Psychiatrist and through him to the court and I take those factors into account. But against you I have to bear in mind that you did initiate this, you used a knife, you inflicted the fatal wound. I have considered previously and again this morning cases to which Counsel drew attention and other cases which the Attorney General has thought fit to refer to the Court of Appeal in England where sentences were thought to be too lenient. There clearly is a range of sentences here but the Crown are entitled to point to the aggravating factor of your very bad record. You are still a young man but you have been guilty of a number of serious assaults and repeated assaults and it is my duty to take that into account. It is also my duty to consider what is the best way of protecting the public in the future from you and it seems to me that one aspect of that would be a prolonged period of Custody Probation in which you would be supervised by the Probation Service. I note that you have told the Probation Service and your Counsel has reiterated your consent to that. Do you consent to Custody Probation?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

THE JUDGE: Then I note that you do. This is not an easy option. If you fail to co-operate with the Probation Service when you are finally at liberty, which of course is going to be in the future, you will be returned to the court. This Order should assist you in reintegrating to society at the end of your custodial sentence. A custodial sentence is clearly required here and a lengthy one but I take into account what has been said. The conclusion I have reached is that the proper sentence is one of 9 years custody with 3 years probation. If you had not consented to that Order I would have imposed a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment. I direct further that as conditions of your Custody Probation Order you shall present yourself in accordance with instructions given by the Probation Officer to participate in the Violence Programme of the Probation Board for Northern Ireland and while there comply with all instructions given by or under the authority of the person in charge. Secondly you will undergo any drug or alcohol counselling treatment as directed by your Probation Officer.