AG v Noel [2003] JRC 027 (07 February 2003)
- Citation
- [2003] JRC 027
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The defendant's guilty plea and cooperation are mitigating factors, but the seriousness of the offences and breach of trust warrant a custodial sentence of three years' imprisonment.
Court disposition
conviction and custodial sentence
Orders
- 3 years' imprisonment on count 1
- 3 years' imprisonment on count 2, concurrent
- total of 3 years' imprisonment
02
Material facts
Parties
Noel
Defendant Counsel: defence counselCrown Advocate
Prosecutor Counsel: Crown AdvocateVictim
ComplainantAmounts and remedies
- Imprisonment Term: 3
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
appropriate sentence for indecent assault upon a child
- 02
consideration of mitigating factors in sentencing
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Defence counsel submitted that Noel was not a predatory child abuser but an opportunistic offender, pleaded guilty, and cooperated with authorities.
- Respondent
- Crown Advocate considered all mitigating factors and emphasized the seriousness and lasting psychological harm caused by the offences.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2nd Ed'n): pp 292-6
Mitigating factors such as guilty plea and cooperation reduce the need for victim to relive trauma.
- 02
Jervis Dykes -v- Attorney General [1999] JLR 146
Sentencing for indecent assault on children must reflect seriousness and breach of trust.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The defendant's guilty plea and cooperation are mitigating factors, but the seriousness of the offences and breach of trust warrant a custodial sentence of three years' imprisonment.
Obiter and limits
- The victim is commended for her courage in bringing these events to the surface.
- Such offences cause long-lasting psychological damage to victims.
Court disposition
conviction and custodial sentence
- 3 years' imprisonment on count 1
- 3 years' imprisonment on count 2, concurrent
- total of 3 years' 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.
Court record
Judgment
JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. Indecent assaults upon children are offences that rightly arouse strong feelings of disgust in most people. The corruption of innocence and the betrayal of the trust that children naturally show towards adults are factors that make such offences amongst the worst in the category of sexual offending.
2. There is often, as there appears to be in this case, long lasting psychological damage to the victim whose own relationships can be affected and damaged by the memory of things that happened many years ago.
3. We wish to commend the victim for her courage in bringing these events to the surface. These offences involving Noel went on for some 2 years and involved digital penetration of the child's vagina and oral sex. There was a gross breach of the trust placed in him as a member of the child's family. It is accepted that the defendant threatened to hurt the child if she told anyone about the abuse.
4. On the other hand, in mitigation, the defendant has pleaded guilty to the indictment and was from the very beginning co-operative with the police and with the other agencies. These are important mitigating factors because it has not been necessary for the victim to re-live her experiences in public. Defence counsel submitted that Noel was not a predatory child abuser but an opportunistic offender and we accept that submission.
5. Noel, you used this child, as she then was, as something with which to satisfy your own sexual urges and you have caused, as we hope you appreciate, great and lasting damage to her. We consider that the Crown Advocate has taken all the mitigating factors fully into account in the conclusions and you are sentenced therefore on count 1, to 3 years' imprisonment; on count 2, to 3 years' imprisonment concurrent, making a total of 3 years' imprisonment. Authorities Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2 nd Ed'n): pp 292-6. Jervis Dykes -v- Attorney General [1999] JLR 146 . A. G. -v- Moignard (6 th June, 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/96]. A. G. -v- Turner (21 st July, 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/143]. Bouhaire -v- A. G. (23 rd January 2001) Jersey Unreported [2001/23]. A. G. -v- Hanby (20 th March, 2002) Jersey Unreported [2002/66] Page Last Updated: 27 Mar 2017 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
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.