The Attorney General v Robert Titterington and Gerard Paul McClafferty

1999/39 2 pages

ROYAL COURT (Samedi Division) 24th February, 1999 Before: F.C. Hamon, Esq., Deputy Bailiff and Jurats Quérée and Le Breton. The Attorney General -v- Robert Titterington and Gerard Paul McClafferty. Robert TITTERINGTON: 1 count of contravening the Shellfish (Underwater Fishing) (Jersey) Regulations, 1998, Regulation 2(1), by taking ormers from the sea whilst totally/partially submerged and breathing with breathing apparatus (count 1); 1 count of contravening the Shellfish (Underwater Fishing) (Jersey) Regulations, 1998, Regulation 2(3), by being the master of a vessel, which was being used for taking ormers from the sea (count 2); and 1 count of contravening the Shellfish (Underwater Fishing) (Jersey) Regulations, 1998, Regulation 4(2), by obstructing a Fisheries Officer in the exercise of his powers under Regulation 4(1) to seize any shellfish taken in contravention of the said Regulations, by throwing a quantity of ormers overboard (count 3). Plea: Facts denied. Verdict: Guilty on all 3 counts. Sentencing adjourned to 25th March, 1999. Gerard Paul McCLAFFERTY: 1 count of contravening the Shellfish (Underwater Fishing) (Jersey) Regulations, 1998, Regulation 2(1), by taking ormers from the sea whilst totally/partially submerged and using breathing apparatus (count 1). 1 count of contravening the Shellfish (Underwater Fishing) (Jersey) Regulations, 1998, Regulation 4(2), by

obstructing a Fisheries Officer in the exercise of his powers under Regulation 4(1) to seize any shellfish taken in contravention of the said Regulations by throwing a quantity of ormers overboard (count 2). Sentencing of Gerard Paul McClafferty after the Jurats found him not guilty on count 1, but guilty on count 2. Conclusions: Count 2: £500, with £1,000 costs, or two months’ imprisonment in default of payment. Sentence and Observations of the Court: £200; no costs order. P. Matthews, Esq., Crown Advocate. Advocate R.G. Morris for the accused.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: The facts of this case are fresh in everybody’s minds. We must remember, however, that Mr. McClafferty was a novice diver and was found not guilty of the offence of diving for ormers. He was found guilty of disposing of the catch, thus frustrating the proper and important investigations of the Fisheries Officers. We need to say that the protection of our limited stocks of ormers is an essential duty of the Fisheries Officers, particularly at this time. We also recall the Crown has stated that he has no criminal record and that in some respects he was under the instruction of Mr. Titterington. Against that he helped to support Mr. Titterington in a concocted story about scallops and crabs and all the rest of the dishonest alibi that was heard in evidence. There are no local precedents for a defence such as this and this case must clearly not be seen to establish a precedent. The maximum fine is £2,000 which shows the seriousness with which the legislature regards offences of this nature. However, McClafferty through his counsel has expressed remorse and he is leaving for Australia with only £500 in liquid cash. In our view it would be wrong to fine him heavily, particularly as he was in a sense a crewman and a novice diver under instruction. The prime mover in this matter is, without doubt, Mr. Titterington and we view this case in an entirely different context. Furthermore it must be said - and it has been said by both sides - that it may well be that Mr. McClafferty acted in a moment of panic. Will you stand up, please, McClafferty. We are going to fine you £200 and there will be no order as to costs. No Authorities.