Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2009]JRC205

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

23^rd October 2009

Before     :

Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt., Commissioner and Jurats Newcombe and King.

The Attorney General

-v-

Yusef Bunting

Daniel Dominic Donald Zonta

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Yusef Bunting

First Indictment

1 count of:

Grave and criminal assault (Count 1).

Age:  28.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On 19^th April, 2009, both defendants had been out drinking.  Also out in town the same night was Steven Mitchell.  All three men were drunk.  At closing time outside the Royal Yacht Hotel the three men, with others, became involved in a disagreement, which was caught on CCTV cameras.  None remembered what it was about.  Mitchell was head-butted by an acquaintance of the defendants (who subsequently left the Island and was never traced).  As a result of this, it is alleged that Mitchell punched Zonta.  Bunting had already been led away from the scene by a friend.  Zonta then punched Mitchell, and the two men were held apart.  However, Zonta's girlfriend then leapt onto Mitchell's back, causing him to sweep her off her feet onto the ground to defend himself.  Zonta again attacked Mitchell, punching him twice and knocking him to the ground.  Then, while Mitchell was on the floor, Bunting ran some 30 yards back to the scene and delivered a single kick to Mitchell's upper body as he was on the floor.

At this point the Police arrived and Bunting and Mitchell were arrested.  Zonta was not arrested until the following morning.  The violence itself lasted approximately 30 seconds.  Mitchell had a badly swollen and bruised left eye and cuts and bruises across his face.  Bunting and Zonta had no injuries.

Bunting later identified himself on the CCTV and admitted kicking Mitchell whilst the latter was on the floor.  He maintained that he had not done it deliberately and had been trying to assist Zonta's girlfriend.  He apologised for his actions.  Zonta said that all he could remember was that his girlfriend had been knocked to the floor.  He identified himself punching Mitchell and said that he was shocked by his actions.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, co-operation, remorse, good work record.

Previous Convictions:

10 previous convictions comprising 24 offences, including previous grave and criminal assault in 2000 for which he received 120 hours Community Service.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 1:

12 months' imprisonment.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court stressed that it would not tolerate this sort of drunken behaviour, but on balance felt about to order non-custodial sentences.

First Indictment

Count 1:

180 hours' Community Service Order or 12 months' imprisonment in default, plus a 12 month Probation Order.

Daniel Dominic Donald Zonta

Second Indictment

1 count of:

Breach of the peace (Count 1).

Age:  25.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Bunting above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, co-operation, good work record, residual youth.

Previous Convictions:

1 previous conviction with 4 previous convictions.  None for violence.

Conclusions:

Second Indictment

Count 1:

£500 fine.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court stressed that it would not tolerate this sort of drunken behaviour, but on balance felt about to order non-custodial sentences.

Second Indictment

Count 1:

£500 fine or 1 month's imprisonment in default, (2 months given in which to pay fine) plus a 6 month Exclusion Order save for shops that sell food and Zonta's fathers restaurant.

C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. L. Preston for the Bunting.

Advocate D. E. Le Cornu for Zonta.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        These two defendants are before the Court as a result of a fracas at the Weighbridge fuelled by the consumption of excessive amounts of alcohol.  People who drink ten pints or more of lager do not react in a considered way to provocation, and violence on the streets is the almost invariable result. 

2.        The Court has frequently said that it will not tolerate this kind of drunken behaviour.  Kicks to the head are at the upper end of grave and criminal assaults.  We accept, however, the submission of counsel for Bunting that there is no evidence of a deliberate assault of this kind and that Bunting's purpose was to get to the side of the girl who had been very roughly treated by the victim of this assault.  We also find it significant that it was the victim of the assault who was arrested first of all by the police, and that before all this took place Bunting had acted as a peacemaker and removed another man from the scene of the argument.  On balance we feel able to deal with the matter by imposing a non-custodial sentence for the grave and criminal assault.

3.        Bunting you have come very close to a custodial sentence.  We have read the references that have been placed before us which are very impressive and it is regrettable that you should find yourself in the position which you now do.  We hope very much that you will learn from the experience, that you will not consume too much alcohol again and that you will never again react in this way to situations of provocation.

4.        The sentence of the Court is that you will perform 180 hours' Community Service to the satisfaction of the Community Service Organiser and we declare that the alternative, if that community service is not properly done, is a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment, and we place you on probation for 1 year subject to the condition that you be of good behaviour during that time and that you live and work as directed by the probation officer and complete any courses which the Probation Service may see fit to direct you to do.

5.        Zonta, if you had backed away from this situation none of this might have happened.  We think that you bear some responsibility for the fact that your co-defendant is in the dock next to you.  We accept that you are a first offender and we accept the submission of your counsel that this was entirely out of character so far as you are concerned. 

6.        We are going to grant the conclusions and we are going to fine you the sum of £500 with an alternative of 1 month's imprisonment and we will give you 2 months to pay that fine.  We are also going to make you the subject of an Exclusion Order from licensed premises for a period of 6 months.  You will not be permitted to go into licensed premises other than those holding a 6^th category licence and other than the restaurant belonging to your father.

Authorities

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.