Jersey Judgment

AG v Laverty [2004] JRC 159 (10 September 2004)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Given the exceptional circumstances, including the guilty plea, cooperation, lack of serious recent convictions, and personal circumstances, a custodial sentence would not serve a useful purpose. An 18-month probation order with conditions is appropriate.

Court disposition

probation order imposed

Orders

  • 18-month probation order imposed on Laverty
  • Completion of Aggression Training Course required
  • Assessment and treatment for drinking problems through Alcohol Study Group required
  • Warning that breach of order may result in imprisonment

02

Material facts

Parties

Laverty

Accused Counsel: Advocate Parslow

Morris

Victim

Crown

Prosecution Counsel: Crown Advocate Binnington

Amounts and remedies

  • Probation Order Duration: 18

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Advocate Parslow argued that Laverty did not break into the house, admitted losing his temper, used only his fists, did not use a weapon or kick, has established a new relationship, has a dependent son, and abided by bail terms. References were supplied in his favour.
Respondent
Crown Advocate Binnington accepted the accused's version of events, described the assault as vicious and cowardly, but acknowledged Laverty's cooperation and guilty plea.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Harrison v AG [2004]JCA046

    Sentencing courts should consider ten factors as set out in Harrison v AG [2004]JCA046.

  2. 02

    A. G. -v- Bennett [1996/13]; A. G. -v- Henry [1999/138]

    Distinction between cases based on seriousness and circumstances of assault.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Given the exceptional circumstances, including the guilty plea, cooperation, lack of serious recent convictions, and personal circumstances, a custodial sentence would not serve a useful purpose. An 18-month probation order with conditions is appropriate.

Obiter and limits

  • Revenge assaults are not condoned by the court.
  • Comparing case with case can be of little forensic value.

Court disposition

probation order imposed

  • 18-month probation order imposed on Laverty
  • Completion of Aggression Training Course required
  • Assessment and treatment for drinking problems through Alcohol Study Group required
  • Warning that breach of order may result in imprisonment

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

[2004] JRC 159

JUDGMENT The COMMISSIONER: 1. For whatever reason and however cogent such reasons may seem to the person involved, this Court is not impressed by revenge assaults.

2. There is little doubt that Laverty was fired by drink when he set out to Morris' flat. It may well be that he did not form the intention to assault Morris physically until there was the confrontation in the bedroom at Steephill Cottage.

3. We accept the accused's version of events as does the Crown. And so we do not accept that any person other than the accused carried out the assault. We must also recall that three days previously Morris had been involved in fights with another lodger and had received injuries.

4. There are, of course, as we have said discrepancies in the accounts of what took place. The assailant and his victim tell very different stories. We believe that Crown Advocate Binnington has taken as fair a view of the incident as possible and we accept that the injuries specified by the Crown were a result of the assaults by Laverty. In contrast, it must be noted that Laverty's injuries were slight: there was bruising and a small graze at the back of the thumb.

5. In Harrison -v- AG [2004]JCA046 the Court of Appeal set out ten matters which the sentencing court should take into account and we have, of course, carefully considered each of these in turn when we retired. We have to say the assault was a vicious one and the photographs of the injuries suffered by Morris bear that out, but fortunately there do not appear to be any long-term injuries.

6. There was a guilty plea entered on indictment and Laverty has co-operated with the police.

7. We have carefully studied the cases of A. G. -v- Bennett (19 th January 1996) Jersey Unreported; [1996/13] and A. G. -v- Henry (30 th July 1999) Jersey Unreported; [1999/138] but we can distinguish those cases, although as in Henry , we have to say that this was a cowardly assault.

8. Although Laverty has previous convictions, six of the nine were offences against the person but they were all at Magistrate Court level and he has had no serious convictions since 1984 and that is now twenty years ago.

9. As Advocate Parslow has said, he did not break into the house and he admitted that he lost his temper. He did use his fists, no weapon was used and, perhaps more importantly, there was no kicking.

10. He has apparently established a new relationship and his fifteen-year-old son is dependent upon him.

11. Comparing case with case can be of little forensic value. We have been particularly impressed, however, by the references supplied by Advocate Parslow and of course by the fact that Laverty has abided by the terms of his bail over a considerable period of time.

12. We feel, in deference to Crown Advocate Binnington, that these are exceptional circumstances and we cannot see that prison is going to serve a useful purpose.

13. We therefore are going to follow the recommendations of the Probation Officer and we are going to impose an 18 month Probation Order. You will be bound to complete the Aggression Training Course and your drinking problems will be assessed and worked on through the Alcohol Study Group. Now, this is not an easy course you are going to do, and we have to tell you that if you breach the order, you will be brought back to Court and you may be sent to prison; you understand that. The Probation Officer will deal with the matters that you have to comply with when you leave the Court. Thank you very much Mr Binnington; thank you Mr Parslow. Authorities Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2 nd Ed'n): pp.287-94; 310-19. Harrison -v- AG [2004]JCA046. A. G. -v- Bennett (19 th January 1996)Jersey Unreported; [1996/13]. A. G. -v- Henry (30 th July 1999)Jersey Unreported; [1999/138]. A. G. -v- Seaward (10 th November 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/222]. A. G. -v- Ross (27 th July 2001) Jersey Unreported; [2001/165]. A. G. -v- Foy (11 th September 2001) Jersey Unreported; [2001/194]. A. G. -v- Le Masurier [2003]JRC168. Page Last Updated: 24 Jun 2016 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.

Harrison v AG [2004]JCA046

Case cited

A. G. -v- Bennett [1996/13]

Case cited

A. G. -v- Henry [1999/138]

Case cited

A. G. -v- Seaward [2000/222]

Case cited

A. G. -v- Ross [2001/165]

Case cited

A. G. -v- Foy [2001/194]

Case cited

A. G. -v- Le Masurier [2003]JRC168

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.