AG -v- T [2017] JRC 169 (17 October 2017)

AG -v- T [2017] JRC 169 (17 October 2017)

The Court determined that, while not bound by the English Sentencing Council Guidelines, it would have regard to their rationale for assessing seriousness, harm, and culpability. Given the gravity, duration, and psychological impact of the offences, and the abuse of trust, a starting and finishing point of 8 years' imprisonment was appropriate, exceeding previous Jersey sentencing bands. Mitigation for good character was given little weight. The Court imposed concurrent sentences and granted compensation and restraining orders.

Citation
[2017] JRC 169
Parties
Prosecution: The Crown; Defendant: Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
17 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing Judgment After Jury Conviction
Outcome
conviction and sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Indecent Assault, Sentencing Guidelines, Child Abuse, Digital Penetration, Psychological Harm, Mitigating and Aggravating Factors
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Indecent Assault Sentencing Guidelines Child Abuse Digital Penetration Psychological Harm Mitigating and Aggravating Factors

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing Judgment After Jury Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentencing range for indecent assault involving digital penetration of a child
  2. 2 Applicability of English Sentencing Council Guidelines in Jersey
  3. 3 Assessment of aggravating and mitigating factors in sexual offences against children

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that, while not bound by the English Sentencing Council Guidelines, it would have regard to their rationale for assessing seriousness, harm, and culpability. Given the gravity, duration, and psychological impact of the offences, and the abuse of trust, a starting and finishing point of 8 years' imprisonment was appropriate, exceeding previous Jersey sentencing bands. Mitigation for good character was given little weight. The Court imposed concurrent sentences and granted compensation and restraining orders.

Court Disposition

conviction and sentence upheld

Orders

  • 8 years' imprisonment for six counts of indecent assault (concurrent sentences)
  • Compensation order of £50,000 to the victim