Jersey Judgment

AG -v- Quinn [2015] JRC 121 (03 June 2015)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The defendant's offending involved category 4 images on the Copine scale, warranting a custodial sentence. Absence of aggravating features and guilty plea reduced the starting point, but no sufficient basis existed to depart from the policy of imprisonment for such offences.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 12 months' imprisonment
  • subject to notification requirements for 5 years
  • restraining orders for 5 years
  • forfeiture and destruction of the computer

02

Material facts

Parties

The Crown

Prosecutor

Defendant

Accused Counsel: defence counsel

Amounts and remedies

  • Number of Still Images: 30
  • Number of Moving Images: 4
  • Notification Period (years): 5
  • Restraining Order Period (years): 5
  • Imprisonment (months): 12

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Crown argued for the application of sentencing guidelines based on the Copine scale and requested notification and restraining orders.
Respondent
Defence counsel highlighted the absence of aggravating features, the defendant's guilty plea, distress, shame, and mental health issues, and referenced alcohol use.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    AG v Godson and Crowley [2013] (2) JLR 1

    Sentencing for indecent images of children is guided by the Copine scale and relevant case law; prison sentences are imposed save in exceptional circumstances.

  2. 02

    Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994

    Notification and restraining orders are appropriate for offenders convicted under the Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The defendant's offending involved category 4 images on the Copine scale, warranting a custodial sentence. Absence of aggravating features and guilty plea reduced the starting point, but no sufficient basis existed to depart from the policy of imprisonment for such offences.

Obiter and limits

  • Downloading indecent images of children is not a victimless crime.
  • Alcohol use cannot be a mitigating factor or excuse.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • 12 months' imprisonment
  • subject to notification requirements for 5 years
  • restraining orders for 5 years
  • forfeiture and destruction of the computer

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

[2015] JRC 121

JUDGMENT THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: 1. You have pleaded guilty to one charge of making indecent photographs of children, contrary to Article 2(1)(a) of the Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994 . Those indecent images comprise some 30 still images and 4 moving images of children under the age of 16. The large majority of these still images are within category 1 of the Copine scale as are 2 of the moving images. There are, however, 4 still images under category 3 and 2 moving images under category 4 of the Copine scale which are, of course, the most serious of the images.

2. We have had regard to the authority of AG v Godson and Crowley [2013] (2) JLR 1 and, as 2 of the indecent images and 2 of the moving images are at category 4, your offending falls within category 4 of the guidelines referred to in that case and this gives an initial figure or point of departure for the Court's consideration of a sentence of 3 years' imprisonment. The absence of aggravating features referred to by the Crown, and indeed by your counsel, moves the Court in the direction of a starting point of 2 years' imprisonment.

3. As the Court has said on a number of occasions, downloading indecent images of children is not a victimless crime, particularly when the images are at levels 4 or 5 on the Copine scale. It is inevitably the case that real children have been subjected to the sexual practices which are shown in the films or pictures with all of the suffering and damaging consequences which flow from that. People who download material of this nature provide a market for the people who make films and images and therefore they indirectly contribute to the suffering of the children involved. It is for that reason that the Court has said repeatedly that save in exceptional circumstances, a prison sentence will be imposed in such cases.

4. We have read and considered with the greatest care the social enquiry report and your psychiatric assessments. We have, of course, also listened most carefully to everything that your counsel has said on your behalf and read your letter and the other letters provided. You have pleaded guilty and you are entitled to credit for that and we accept your very real distress and your sense of shame in finding yourself in these circumstances. However, we note that it was clear from the title of the material downloaded what the content would have been and the search terms that you have used were inevitably going to produce images of this nature. We acknowledge the part that alcohol may have played in your offending but that cannot be a mitigating factor or offer any excuse.

5. We order that you will be subject to the notification requirements and agree with the Crown that it should be 5 years from today before you can apply to come off them. We also make the restraining orders asked for by the Crown again for a period of 5 years.

6. The Court has found this case an extraordinarily difficult one but, taking all of the factors into account, the Court has found no sufficient bases to depart from its' clearly stated policy and the sentence of the Court is that you will go to prison for 12 months.

7. We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the computer.

8. In sentencing you as we have done, we have noted the mental health issues that are identified in the psychiatric report and we urge you to take full advantage of the help that you will receive whilst in prison. Authorities Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994. AG v Godson and Crowley [2013] (2) JLR 1. AG v Brown [2015] JRC 062 . AG v Cardy [2011] JRC 096 . Page Last Updated: 27 Sep 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.

AG v Godson and Crowley [2013] (2) JLR 1

Case cited

AG v Brown [2015] JRC 062

Case cited

AG v Cardy [2011] JRC 096

Case cited

Protection of Children (Jersey) Law 1994

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.