Superior Number Sentencing - Malicious damage - Arson
[2020]JRC124
Royal Court
(Samedi)
29 June 2020
|
Before :
|
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and
Jurats Olsen, Thomas and Austin-Vautier.
|
The Attorney General
-v-
Margaret Anne Leahy
Sentencing by the
Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the
Inferior Number on 13th March, 2020, following guilty pleas to the
following charges:
|
1 count of:
|
Malicious damage (Count 1).
|
|
1 count of:
|
Arson (Count 2).
|
Age: 60.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
In September 2017, the defendant
moved into rented accommodation in St Helier, a three storey property
comprising four flats. All of the
flats were occupied at the material time, with the defendant residing on the
third floor, and the owner landlord residing on the ground floor. During the tenancy, the defendant sent
unwanted messages to her landlord complaining about his conduct, including his
failure to address a broken sink.
On the morning of 8th
January 2020, the defendant attended at Police Headquarters and reported that
she had set fire to “every room”
of her flat. When asked if anyone
might be trapped inside the building, she stated: “Well no, as far as I know everyone’s out at work”. She explained that the firefighters
could gain access through an unlocked window.
Two fire engines and the Rapid
Intervention Vehicle attended at the scene (six fire officers in all, the full
resource available at the time).
They gained access through an unlocked window and entered the
smoke-filled flat using breathing equipment. The fire was extinguished within a few
minutes. It was established that no
residents were inside the building.
Considerable smoke and fire damage
was caused to the defendant’s flat and water damage was caused to the
flat below due to a pipe that burst as a result of the fire. The defendant had written graffiti on
the walls throughout the communal areas of the building and inside her own
flat. She had, in her own word,
“trashed” her flat,
smashing a bathroom basin with a hammer, cutting plugs off electrical
appliances, and slicing open a mattress.
A fire investigation established
that there were five or six individual seats of fire, some of which were
flaming on arrival of firefighters.
Toilet paper tapers had been set in each room, indicating an intention
for the fires to spread, and other combustible items had been used. Ventilation was limited due to the doors
and windows being closed, which prevented the fires taking hold. There was a risk of the fire spreading
throughout the building, and through the common roof to adjoining buildings.
The defendant accepted that she had
been planning the arson for some time.
She had set out to punish her landlord and cause him maximum financial
loss.
Details of Mitigation:
The defendant reported the arson
to the Police (albeit after a 20 minute delay), was compliant and made full
admissions at the outset, and pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. She had the benefit of previous good
character.
A psychiatric assessment
concluded that the defendant was showing characteristics consistent with a
diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
The offences were partly motivated by her desire to obtain assistance from
mental health services.
The defendant was assessed as
being at high risk of reconviction.
Previous Convictions:
None.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1:
|
6 months’ imprisonment.
|
|
Count 2:
|
4 years’ imprisonment,
concurrent.
|
Total: 4 years’ imprisonment.
The Crown sought a Restraining Order
under Article 5 of the Crime (Disorderly Conduct and Harassment) (Jersey) Law
2008 in the following terms for an indeterminate period:
That the defendant be prohibited
from approaching or contacting, directly or indirectly, [her landlord] other
than any contact which is inadvertent or unavoidable.
The Court was invited to make a
Compensation Order if satisfied that the defendant had the means to pay
compensation.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1:
|
1 month’s imprisonment.
|
|
Count 2:
|
2 years and 6 month’s imprisonment,
concurrent.
|
Total: 2 years and 6 month’s
imprisonment.
No Compensation Order
or Restraining Order imposed.
M. R. Maletroit Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate L. V. Marks for the Defendant
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1.
Margaret
Leahy you are 60 years old and have no previous convictions. You appear before the Court today to be
sentenced in respect of two offences committed on the same occasion, just two
days before your 60th birthday; an offence of malicious damage and
an offence of arson. You have
pleaded guilty to both offences.
2.
The
offences were committed in accommodation that you rented from your
landlord. In September 2017 you
moved into accommodation in St Helier which you rented. This was a three storey property
comprising four flats. All the
flats were occupied in the sense that they were let when you committed this
offence. Your flat was on the top
floor, the third floor, and the landlord lived on the ground floor.
3.
Late in
the morning on 8th January 2020, you set fire to your flat. You did so deliberately. Indeed when you went to the police
station to report what you had done, which we accept is a mitigating
circumstance, you told the receptionist at the Police Headquarters that the
fire you had set was in every room of your flat. The fire investigation officer who
attended your flat found that there were five or six individual seats of fire
when the fire officers arrived, with two fires in the living room in flames and
others smouldering. Ventilation to
the flat was limited as you had closed the windows which caused the fires to
burn separately and prevented them from taking hold.
4.
As was
clear when you were interviewed by the police, during which you made full
admissions, you spent the morning “trashing”
your flat. This included cutting
the plugs off certain appliances, smashing a wall basin with a hammer and
cutting the stuffing out of a mattress.
5.
To set the
fires you draped blankets and sheets over doors and gathered flammable material
and belongings in heaps in rooms and stuffed toilet paper into cupboards in the
eaves of the building. You were
unable to light all the fires that you intended to light because of the amount
of smoke that was produced when you lit the first fires.
6.
The fires
that you set, although extinguished rapidly by fire officers, caused extensive
damage to your flat and flood damage to the flat below. We have seen photographs of the damage
and some of the cost of re-instating the damage has not been covered by the
landlords’ insurance.
7.
When you
were arrested at the police station you were described as being “highly emotional and distressed”. When you were arrested and cautioned on
suspicion of arson you said “No
suspicion of arson. I did it.
That’s why I am here.
The lengths people have to go to get help in this Island.” When booked into custody at the police
station you told another office “If
I am released today on bail I will set fire to wherever I am released
to.”
8.
The
investigating officers noted that there was a lot of graffiti in the communal
areas of the building and in your flat which you had written that day and the
wording of that graffiti is, in the Court’s view, reflective in the
Court’s view, of various difficulties that you have in your life.
9.
When
interviewed you said that you committed the offence, partly in order to punish
your landlord. You said it was
“revenge”. This seems to be the case because as a
result of your loneliness and social isolation you had wanted to build a close
relationship with the landlord based on friendship and he was unwilling or
unable to reciprocate. In this
regard you sent him a number of notes over a long period which the Court has
seen.
10. We have read the clinical psychology report
from a consultant clinical psychologist Dr Amitta Shah. Her clinical opinion is that you show
characteristics and patterns of behaviour which are consistent with a diagnosis
of an underlying autism spectrum disorder.
One aspect of this is that you feel isolated and alone. You have no network of social support
and are desperate to have a community to belong to and to have conversations
with people who have a similar intelligence and views to yourself. It is now recognised that girls and
women on the autistic spectrum have more social and emotional needs than
autistic men and often wish to have friends and emotional and social support
but cannot always achieve this.
11. Dr Shah says you have difficulties in
understanding social interactions and remarks made by others in particular
contexts. This has been very
evident in your interpretation and expectation of what the landlord said in
conversation when you initially viewed the flat and after you moved in. You often felt disappointed and upset
when he did not respond or communicate with you with the frequency and
intensity which you expected on the basis of your interpretation of comments
such as “speak soon” or
“catch up with you” and
the like. This has been a feature
of your life and has left you feeling let down and rejected by others.
12. You do not, in the opinion of Dr Shah, belong
to the group of people who have a special interest or fascination in fires or
arson related activities. But you
do say, and you have said so repeatedly, that if you were released you would do
the same again. You have written
today to the Court, saying that those comments were made out of desperation and
panic. Nonetheless the Probation Officer
records you as being at high risk of re-offending and Dr Shah says that the
risk of your re-offending would be closely related to what your life and living
situation and support network would be outside the custodial context.
13. Dr Shah says that you have been seeing the prison
psychologist whilst in custody which you have found to be helpful and
positive. We have heard about these
weekly sessions and the benefit you derive from them and we have heard from the
Probation Officer to the effect that you still have work to do with that
psychologist. Dr Shah says that
whilst you are in custody you will have the opportunity to work with the
psychologist. This will benefit you
in the sense that it will enable you to understand and accept your diagnosis
and to help you come to terms with past experiences and the stress that you
have suffered. You will benefit
from discussions about your needs and how they can be met outside custody.
14. When you are released you will benefit from
living in a supported residential setting which can meet your needs. As to your needs, they were set out in
some detail in the concluding paragraph of the report from Dr Shah and, in
particular, she referred to the need for you to live in a residential setting
where you would not feel isolated and have the opportunity to talk to people
and feel supported. Until today we
were of the view from the evidence that we had that such residential
accommodation was not currently available in Jersey. In fact we are told today that it is
available and it is a pity that that was not known over the last 2 years when
we have heard from your advocate that your situation became increasing
difficult, for the reasons that we have heard and as set out in the report from
Acorn. The accommodation that is
available is at the Highlands Care Home in St Saviour which specialises in
providing care for individuals over the age of 18 with special needs.
15. Today your advocate urged upon us a
non-custodial sentence consisting of a suspended period of imprisonment,
coupled with a Probation Order. We
have considered that with some care, but ultimately we were unable to follow
that recommendation. We heard from the
Probation Officer, who helpfully addressed the Court today and we note that
paragraph 11 of the supplemental report, from probation says
“The Court may wish to
consider a prison sentence which would mark the seriousness of the offending
and the risk of harm it posed while also providing [you] with an opportunity to
continue to engage with the Prison Forensic Psychologist in addressing [your]
needs.”
The author says that you:
“…might then be
better equipped to return to the community and dealing with life’s ups
and downs. There is also a concern about whether a non-custodial sentence would
reinforce [your] current belief that [your] offending was justified because her
needs were not being met.”
Although we do accept that your needs not
being met did lead to the offending that we have heard about today.
16. For most of your adult life you have managed to
live independently and the Court hopes that you will do so again in the future.
17. The Crown has drawn our attention to various
cases which illustrate that the general tariff for arson in Jersey is a
sentence of between 3 and 5 years’ imprisonment. In this case the Crown moves for a
period of 4 years’ imprisonment.
Indeed in certain cases much longer sentences may be appropriate for
arson and it is not uncommon for those who commit offences of arson, at least
in England and Wales, to receive sentences of an indeterminate length.
18. However, this is not such a case. There is substantial mitigation
available to you, all of which I hope I have referred to in the judgment of the
Court.
19. This was, as the Crown says, a serious offence
and there are a number of aggravating features. Other persons, had they been present in their
flats, could have been injured or killed but they were not, and this was really
a cry for help on your part. The
Court accordingly imposes a custodial sentence with reluctance, but noting and
accepting that arson is always a serious offence, and that the risk to property
and more importantly to the lives of others when domestic accommodation is set
on fire is always substantial and that, unfortunately in your case you also
currently present a high risk of reconviction and harm to others.
20. Nonetheless we reduce the Crown’s
conclusions and we impose a sentence upon you in relation to Count 1 of 1 month
imprisonment, and Count 2, 2½ years’ imprisonment, both to run
concurrently making a sentence of 2½ years’ imprisonment.
21. This means that you will be eligible for
conditional early release, early next year. We sincerely hope (and we expect this to
be passed on) that accommodation at Highlands is still available to you when
you are released and we also hope that arrangements are made now to ensure that
you will receive the assistance from a psychologist in the community as soon as
you are released.
22. We make no order for compensation and we do not
grant the application for a restraining order.
Authorities
AG
v Coutanche [1989] JCA 106
AG v
Fortun [2002] JRC 205
AG
v Dewhurst [2007] JRC 098
AG
v Corbel [2010] JRC 151B
AG
v Faulkner [2011] JRC 046C
AG
v Faria [2016] JRC 070A.