Inferior Number Sentencing - knowingly entered Jersey without leave -
avoidance of enforcement action
[2025]JRC089
Royal Court
(Samedi)
27 March 2025
|
Before :
|
A. R. Binnington Esq.,
Commissioner, and Jurats Berry and Powell
|
The Attorney General
-v-
David Henry Law
Sentencing by the Inferior
Number of the Royal Court, following conviction by Magistrate’s Court
Trial on 7 February 2025 to the following charges:
|
1 count of:
|
Knowingly entered the Bailiwick of Jersey
without leave contrary to Section 24(1)(a) of the Immigration Act 1971 as
extended by Schedule 1A of the Immigration (Jersey) Order 2021 (Count
1).
|
|
1 count of:
|
Sought to obtain or secure the avoidance or
postponement of enforcement action against him, by means of deception,
contrary to Section 24A(1)(b) of the Immigration Act 1971 as extended by
Schedule 1A of the Immigration (Jersey) Order 2021. (Count 2).
|
Age: 35
Plea: Not Guilty
Details of Offence:
On 19 September 2024 at around
7:05pm, two members of the public heard a voice calling for help from the beach
in Rozel Bay. A man was then
spotted in the sea holding a brightly coloured buoyancy aid and the emergency
services were called.
A rescue boat collected the
Defendant from the rocks and took him into a nearby home whilst waiting for
emergency services. The Defendant
told the rescue team he had been swimming around the island and was wearing a
short leg wetsuit, a swim cap, a pair of goggles and a belt bag, which
contained 265 euros in notes.
When questioned by customs officers,
the Defendant stated that he had been in the water for 13 hours and had swum
from a beach in France, but he could not state which beach. He claimed to have had no fixed abode for
the last 15 years. He claimed to
have swum to Jersey in order to return home to London. The Defendant claimed to be a British
Citizen but had no identification or travel documentation to prove this claim.
The Defendant gave minimal
information in respect of his family and where he had lived previously to
arriving in Jersey. He said he had
no family in Jersey, the UK or anywhere else in the world and that he had lived
a ‘drifting’ lifestyle, walking between European cities with no
profession and making money by busking on the streets and challenging members
of the public to push-up competitions.
He stated to have trained for his swim in Lake Geneva, swimming for 8-9
hours at a time without a wetsuit. He
said that he never had contact with border control or police but would not
answer whether he had a Visa for any country.
Various checks were done by Customs
to ascertain the veracity of the Defendant’s account and confirm his identity;
however, no matches were found against the Jersey and UK immigration databases.
Details of Mitigation:
No identifiable mitigation.
Previous Convictions:
No previous convictions.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1:
|
4 months’ imprisonment, concurrent to
Count 2.
|
|
Count 2:
|
15 months’ imprisonment.
|
Total: 15 months’
imprisonment.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1:
|
4 months’ imprisonment, concurrent to
Count 2.
|
|
Count 2:
|
15 months’ imprisonment.
|
Total: 15
months’ imprisonment.
L Taylor, Crown Advocate.
Advocate M. L Preston for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE commissioner:
1.
David
Henry Law, you appear before us for sentencing in respect of one count of
knowingly entering Jersey without leave and one count of seeking to obtain or
secure the avoidance or postponement of enforcement action against you by means
of deception, after being found near rocks at Rozel in September 2024 after, on
your account, swimming from France.
You claimed to have been born the 14 July 1989 which, if correct, would
make you 35 years old. However,
like all the other information that you have provided about yourself, there is
no means of verifying whether or not that is correct.
2.
You were
found guilty of both offences following a trial in the Magistrate’s Court
on 7 February 2025 and were remanded to this Court for sentence. Given that not one piece of information
that you have provided concerning your identity, your nationality, your family
or your previous whereabouts can be independently verified, there is little or
nothing that can be said by way of mitigation. You clearly intended to travel to the
United Kingdom via Jersey, in a manner which avoided the use of identity
documents and if your account is true, the trip to Jersey was planned in
advance, given that you told the immigration officers about the training that
you did for the swim.
3.
The
maximum sentence for knowingly entering Jersey without leave is 6 months’
imprisonment and the maximum in respect of seeking to obtain and or secure the
avoidance of postponement of enforcement action by deception is 2 years’
imprisonment and/or a fine.
4.
As was
made clear by the Crown, the Court has previously indicated that given
Jersey’s proximity to France, the Court should have regard to the need to
deter those who may be tempted to use the Island as a back door to the UK, and
the sentences imposed should act as a deterrent. It may well be, as Advocate Preston
pointed out, that Jersey’s geographical location has helped to avoid a
situation such as that in the United Kingdom where thousands of people try to
enter the jurisdiction illegally.
5.
However,
anyone who attempts to use Jersey as a back door, is likely to be dealt with by
means of a custodial sentence. Not
only did you knowingly enter the Island without leave, but you ensured that you
had no documentation and provided as little verifiable information as possible
so as to make it difficult or impossible for immigration officers to ascertain
your status. You have caused the
local authorities to spend time endeavouring to ascertain your identity, and
for that the sentence must reflect both an element of punishment and
deterrents. Stand up, please.
6.
In the
light of those considerations we agree with the Crown’s conclusions and
therefore sentence you as follows:-
(i)
Count 1, 4
months’ imprisonment to run concurrently to Count 2.
(ii) Count 2, 15 months’ imprisonment.
Making a total of 15 months’
imprisonment.
7.
We note
that a deportation notice has been served on you, and we are satisfied that you
fall within the provisions of section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1971,
extended to Jersey by virtue of the Immigration (Jersey) Order 1993. In considering whether to recommend
deportation, we must ask ourselves two questions. First is your continued presence
detrimental to the Island, if the answer to that is yes, then second, we must
consider the effect of your deportation on the human rights of innocent persons
connected to you and your own human rights.
8.
In
relation to the first question, given that it is not possible to verify your
identity it is difficult to assess the effect on the Island of your continued
presence. However, you have been
convicted of a serious offence, and we regard your use of deception to avoid
enforcement action as a matter that makes your continued presence
undesirable.
9.
In
relation to the second part of the test, you claim to have no friends or family
and therefore, there is no evidence that the human rights of anyone connected
to you would be affected by your deportation. Given that you have no home in the
Island nor personal connection to it, we do not find that your human rights
would be adversely affected by a deportation order. As the Crown has pointed out this is an
unusual case given the question mark regarding your identity.
10. It is apparent that if we recommend deportation,
further investigation will have to be done on behalf of the Minister for
Justice and Home Affairs regarding where you were resident or a citizen in
order to identify where you would be deported to. No doubt that difficulty is one of the
intended consequences of your deception, whether you are deported is however,
ultimately a matter for the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs.
11. In the circumstances, we recommend your
deportation. Given your counsel’s
comments as to your wish as to certainty of outcome, we would hope that the
Minister will begin the consideration of how you will be dealt with at the
conclusion of your sentence as soon as possible. It is in your interests that you
co-operate fully with that exercise.
Authorities
Immigration (Jersey) Order 2021
Immigration Act, 1971
Immigration (Jersey) Order 1993
AG
v Marreakhy [2016] JRC 199A
Merikhi v AG [2016] JRC 187
R v Heng Pit
Ding [2011] 1 Cr. App. R. (S.) 91
R v Nasir Ali [2001] EWCA Crim 2874