Jersey Judgment

AG v Ahier (Royal Court : Sentencing (Criminal) : MacRae) [2026] JRC 068 (27 February 2026)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Deliberate use of counterfeit currency over multiple occasions, absence of strong mitigation, and high risk of reconviction justify immediate custodial sentence.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 15 months' imprisonment concurrent on each count
  • forfeiture and destruction of counterfeit bank notes
  • no order for compensation

02

Material facts

Parties

Terence Colin Ahier

Defendant Counsel: counsel for defendant

The Crown

Prosecutor Counsel: crown counsel

Amounts and remedies

  • Number of Forged Notes Used: GBP 7
  • Sentence Length: months 15

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Defendant, through counsel, claimed acceptance of responsibility and cited age and small number of notes as mitigation.
Respondent
Crown argued for immediate custodial sentence due to deliberate use of counterfeit notes, high risk of reconviction, and lack of exceptional mitigation.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court precedent

    Possession and use of counterfeit money is a serious offence warranting immediate imprisonment unless exceptional circumstances exist.

  2. 02

    Sentencing practice

    Minimal credit for guilty plea entered at the eleventh hour.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Deliberate use of counterfeit currency over multiple occasions, absence of strong mitigation, and high risk of reconviction justify immediate custodial sentence.

Obiter and limits

  • Public confidence in currency must be maintained.
  • Age and small number of notes passed considered in reducing sentence slightly.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • 15 months' imprisonment concurrent on each count
  • forfeiture and destruction of counterfeit bank notes
  • no order for compensation

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2026] JRC 068

JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. Terence Colin Ahier, you are 23 years of age, and you appear to be sentenced for seven counts of knowingly using forged paper money. You pleaded guilty on the day of your trial.

2. In November 2024, the States of Jersey Police received an influx of reports from various businesses reporting the use of counterfeit bank notes. This was a consequence of you using counterfeit English £20 bank notes at seven different businesses in various locations and you did so successfully on all bar one occasion.

3. When you were interviewed after your arrest, you made no comment. The footage of you making purchases and the other material produced in the course of the investigation indicated that on each occasion you made a small purchase in terms of value designed to obtain as much genuine currency by way of change as you could receive. On one day, 15 November, you went to three different shops within the space of one hour and presented a forged English £20 note at each and made a small purchase.

4. When you were charged with the offences last July, you entered not guilty pleas which you maintained when you were arraigned in this Court. The case was set down for a three-day trial. Accordingly, having pleaded guilty at the eleventh hour on the day of the trial, you will receive minimal credit for those pleas of guilty.

5. You have previous convictions, although none of particular relevance to this offence. You were sent to prison for 18 months by the Royal Court in 2021 for grave and criminal assault and breach of probation and community service orders.

6. We note from the pre-sentence report that you still refuse to accept full responsibility for these offences although today through your counsel you say that you do. You have not revealed where the counterfeit money came from, save to say today that it came from someone you did work for. You refused to engage with any community orders that might be considered in this case when speaking to the Probation Officer, although you have changed your stance through your counsel today. In any event you have previously breached such orders through non-compliance. Accordingly, there is no recommendation for an alternative to custody today, at least in the Probation Report even if the Court was minded to consider one, which it is not as the custody threshold has been passed and there is no alternative to an immediate prison sentence.

7. Possession and use of counterfeit money is a serious offence and has been recognised as such by the courts for a long time. Generally, the sentence is one of immediate imprisonment and the Court has previously held that people who use such money and do so deliberately as you did should expect to go to prison unless there are very strong or exceptional circumstances. It is essential that there is public confidence in the currency circulating in the island. You used these notes in several retail premises over a nine-day period. You are at high risk of reconviction. We agree with the Crown that a custodial sentence is inevitable, and we also agree and find that there is no strong let alone exceptional mitigation available in your case.

8. We have had regard to all that has been said on your behalf and the contents of the pre-sentence report, and we are able to reduce the Crown's conclusions slightly principally on account of your age. You were only 22 when committing these offences. We have also given weight to the relatively small number of notes that were passed.

9. In those circumstances the sentence of the Court is 15 months' imprisonment concurrent on each count making a total of 15 months' imprisonment.

10. In view of your means and the sentence we have passed we make no order for compensation.

11. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the counterfeit bank notes. Authorities R -v- Howard [1986] 82 Cr. App. R. AG -v- Kearns 1998/38 AG -v- Whiteman [2004] JRC 146 R -v- Miller (David) [2010] EWCA Crim 257 Oeillet -v- AG [2013] JRC 083 AG -v- O'Brien [2021] JRC 272 Page Last Updated: 09 Mar 2026 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

R v Howard [1986] 82 Cr. App. R.

Case cited

AG v Kearns 1998/38

Case cited

AG v Whiteman [2004] JRC 146

Case cited

R v Miller (David) [2010] EWCA Crim 257

Case cited

Oeillet v AG [2013] JRC 083

Case cited

AG v O'Brien [2021] JRC 272

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.