AG -v- Simmonds [2007] JRC 019 (26 January 2007)
- Citation
- [2007] JRC 019
- 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
Given the low severity of the offences, the defendant's acceptance of wrongdoing, willingness to accept help, and strong family support, a probation order rather than imprisonment is justified.
Court disposition
probation order granted
Orders
- Defendant placed on probation for 2 years subject to usual conditions and completion of any directed sex offending programme.
02
Material facts
Parties
Unknown Defendant
DefendantCrown
Prosecution Counsel: Crown AdvocateAmounts and remedies
- Probation Period: 2
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
appropriate sentence for acts of indecency with children
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The defendant acknowledged wrongdoing, accepted help, and had family support. The offences were at the lowest end of the scale and the defendant was of previous good character.
- Respondent
- The Crown Advocate submitted that the usual punishment for acts of indecency with children is prison, but acknowledged mitigating factors.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
court's reasoning
Usual punishment for acts of indecency with children is imprisonment, but mitigation may justify probation.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Given the low severity of the offences, the defendant's acceptance of wrongdoing, willingness to accept help, and strong family support, a probation order rather than imprisonment is justified.
Court disposition
probation order granted
- Defendant placed on probation for 2 years subject to usual conditions and completion of any directed sex offending programme.
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. As you have heard the Crown Advocate say, the usual punishment for men who commit acts of indecency with children is prison. Even if these girls were not entirely blameless, you did corrupt them by giving them money in exchange for sexual gratification. We accept that these offences are at the lowest end of the scale and much more importantly, that you have acknowledged to yourself and to others that you have done wrong, that your behaviour was unacceptable, and that you are prepared to accept the help that has been offered to you, 2. You are fortunate that you still have the support of your family and that they are prepared to help you too. We accept that before all this happened you were a man of good character, and that you are now prepared to work with the Probation service, and your family, to put your life together again.
3. On that basis we are going to grant the conclusions of the Crown Advocate and you will be placed on probation for a period of 2 years, subject to the usual conditions that you live and work as directed by the Probation Officer, and in addition, that you attend and complete any sex offending programme which you may be directed to attend. No Authorities Page Last Updated: 10 Jun 2015 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.