AG v Perez (Royal Court : Sentencing (Criminal) : Le Cocq) [2025] JRC 143 (27 May 2025)

JUDGMENT THE BAILIFF: 1. On 4 April 2025, Aaron Perez (-�the Defendant-�) appeared before this Court to be sentenced for one count of sexual touching without consent and one count of rape, both involving the same victim. At the time of the offending, the victim was 14 years of age, and the Defendant was 19 years of age. The victim is now 17, and the Defendant is 22.

2. The Defendant and the victim had first encountered each other when the Defendant was 16 and the victim was 11 by making contact on Snapchat. The Defendant knew the victim's age and accordingly that he was older than her.

3. On 11 or 12 March 2022, when the victim was 14 years of age, during a sleepover at her friend's house, she and her friend left the house and met the Defendant near Victoria College and the three of them walked around. This was the first time that they had met in person.

4. On 13 March 2022, whilst the victim was still staying at the friend's house, she and the Defendant were messaging. At approximately 11 pm, the victim left her friend's house, alone, and met the Defendant, climbing out of her friend's bedroom window in order to do so.

5. They walked together and the Defendant gave the victim his coat because she was cold. At around midnight, the victim suggested they sit down and they sat in a field. The victim lay down and the Defendant lay next to her. The Defendant then touched the victim on her thigh, up and down with his hand, and then moved his hand to her vaginal area. The victim was wearing shorts with leggings on top and the Defendant put his hands under the leggings but over her shorts. As soon as he did this the victim said -� no -� but the Defendant kept his hand over her vagina. The victim squeezed her legs together and repeated -� no -� at which point the Defendant stopped. This forms the basis for the sexual touching without consent count on the indictment.

6. The Defendant then went on to kiss the victim and he put his hand around her neck. The victim heard a zip noise of the Defendant's trousers undoing and the Defendant whispered "If you kiss it, you can go home". She asked to go home, and he repeated what he had said. She then described the Defendant as shoving his penis into her mouth and she froze. The Defendant removed his penis and then asked the victim to get onto her hands and knees, but she remained silent and shook her head in refusal. He then put it back into her mouth. He assured her that he would not hurt her and was stroking her hair. He ejaculated into her mouth. These facts form the count of rape on the indictment.

7. The victim made a disclosure to a friend of hers, and on 14 March 2022, she attended Dewberry House and agreed to undergo a forensic medical examination, including a mouth swab which was sent for testing. The victim felt unable to formalise her complaint for some time, but eventually did so, giving an ABE interview in July 2023. The Defendant was arrested, interviewed and voluntarily provided a DNA sample which was sent for examination in November 2023. The results provided extremely strong support (the strongest level of support on the appropriate scale) that the DNA found in the victim's mouth, which was semen, belonged to the Defendant.

8. The Defendant was accordingly interviewed for a second time and questioned about the forensic results, and he provided no comment answers.

9. The Crown put before us a number of cases which established the approach of the courts to sentencing for sexual offences relating to children. In K v AG and AG v F [2016] JCA 219 and W v AG [2022] JCA 117 , the court habitually referred to the sentencing guidelines from the Sentencing Council in England and Wales to identify harm and culpability factors, together with aggravating and mitigating features, although the court does not necessarily apply the scales of sentencing set out in those guidelines.

10. The Crown also put before us the recent judgment in the case of AG v Roberts , [2025] JRC 081 , in which the court carried out an extensive review of sentencing cases insofar as they relate to rape of an adult. In that case, the court eschewed, for cases of that nature, referring either to the principles set out in Milberry v R [2002] EWCA Crim 2891 , which had previously set out guidance for the court on rape sentencing in adults. In AG v Roberts , the court preferred to set out its own factors (which it did in non-exhaustive lists appended to the judgment) of both harm and culpability factors and aggravating and mitigating factors. The Crown urges that the principles in the AG v Roberts case are as applicable to cases of this nature as they are to the rape of adults. To an extent we agree.

11. In terms of the assessment of harm, there is no doubt about it that the victim was particularly vulnerable. She has provided a Victim Impact Statement in which she says "Before this happened to me I was bubbly, I liked going out and I was lively and I think fun.... Now I want to stay at home and I don't like being around people. I shut myself off from others and my circle has become smaller". She also says that her relationship with her father has been affected because she does not like the fact that he knows some of the details of what happened to her, and there has been disruption to her education. She has begun to manage her anxiety and tension, although feels that these have continued to have an impact on her. Although she has tried to put things behind her, she was forced to relive the experience and talk about it again in anticipation of this matter coming up at the trial.

12. In terms of culpability, the Crown submitted that there is a substantial amount of planning, and the Defendant appears to accept in his pre-sentencing report that he intended there to be sexual contact between himself and the victim on the second occasion they met.

13. In terms of aggravating features, we agree with the Crown's statement that ejaculation into the victim's mouth was an aggravating factor, but do not agree that the location of the offence or indeed its timing was such.

14. In terms of comparable cases in Jersey, in AG v Vincent [2013] JRC 203 , the accused who was then aged 17, met the victim then aged 13 on Facebook. When the victim was invited round to the accused's house, he refused to let her leave and threatened her unless she had sex with him. He threatened to strangle her and put his hands around her neck and tried to insert his penis into her vagina. She struggled and he eventually forced his penis into her mouth but did not ejaculate. He was found guilty following a trial and sentenced to six years youth detention for attempted rape, and three years youth detention with regard to the insertion of the penis into the victim's mouth.

15. Because of the age of the Defendant in this case, we have considered the provision of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 (the -�Law-�). We do not need to set out Article 4 of the Law and we agree that we must approach the matter by considering the sentence that the Defendant would likely get had he been sentenced at the date of the commission of the offence, and therefore the provisions of the Law apply. We agree with the Crown's assessment that the nature of this offending is too serious to justify a non-custodial sentence.

16. We note that the Defendant has no relevant previous convictions.

17. The Crown recommends in the light of all of the circumstances that the Defendant is sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment with regard to sexual touching without consent, to run concurrently with 5 years' imprisonment with regard to the rape, making a total of 5 years' imprisonment.

18. In addition to good character and the obvious allowance to be made for the Defendant's youth at the time, this case has the striking feature, in our view, of an extremely high level of genuine remorse which derives, in part at least, from a realisation of the effect of the offending on the victim in this case. By way of example, in the pre-sentencing report, the Defendant had decided to plead guilty to avoid the impact that a trial would have on the victim and said that he "could not begin to imagine the impact it has had on [the victim]". He took responsibility for his actions.

19. As set against this, we note that his guilty pleas came late, and it was only shortly before the trial that the victim was able to be relieved from her anxiety of having to give evidence at the trial.

20. We do not disagree with the sentences proposed by the Crown in its conclusions but, looking at the matter in the round, we think that a greater allowance can be given in respect of the genuine remorse which the Defendant has exhibited, the fact that the victim was spared the ordeal of a trial, and we have noted the number and quality of the references provided on the Defendant's behalf. In the circumstances, we sentenced the Defendant to: Count 1 / Sexual touching without consent - 9 months imprisonment; and Count 2 / Rape - 4 years imprisonment, both concurrent; Making a total of 4 years imprisonment.

21. A number of ancillary orders were sought by the Crown, including those relating to notification requirements under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 and restrictions on contact with children and the victim in particular. With regard to the former, we ordered that a period of 7 years should expire before the Defendant may apply to be removed from the notification requirements on the Sex Offenders Register, and we made the restrictive orders sought by the Crown for a duration of 7 years. The defence made no objection to the Crown's application in these regards.

22. The Crown has sought a further order relating to the use of computers and we have deferred consideration of that order, with agreement between the Crown and the defence, for consideration on a separate occasion. Authorities K v AG and AG v F [2016] JCA 219 W v AG [2022] JCA 117 . AG v Roberts , [2025] JRC 081 . Milberry v R [2002] EWCA Crim 2891 . AG v Vincent [2013] JRC 203 . Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014. Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010. Page Last Updated: 02 Jun 2025 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII