1999/18
3 pages
ROYAL COURT
(Samedi
Division)
22nd
January, 1999
Before: Sir Philip Bailhache, Bailiff, and
Jurats Potter and Le Breton
The
Attorney General
-v-
Debbie
Louise Horgan
1
count of obtaining
services by false pretences (count1);
1 count
of furnishing false
information with intent to obtain a sum as on account of an allowance, contrary
to Article 16(a) of the Family Allowances (Jersey) Law, 1972 (count 2);
1
count of wrongfully
obtaining a sum as on account of an allowance, contrary to Article 16(b) of the
Family Allowances (Jersey) Law, 1972 (count 3).
Admitted breach of
a 2 year Probation Order made on 20th December, 1996, (see Jersey Unreported Judgment of
that date) in the Royal Court, following guilty pleas to:
2 counts of fraud
(counts 1,2);
2 counts of
falsification of accounts (counts 3,4);
2 counts of
obtaining money by false pretences (counts 5,6).
Plea: Guilty.
Age: 27.
Details of Offence:
Count 1: The defendant fraudulently induced an
elderly gentleman to enter into an agreement for a mobile phone by making him
believe he was merely providing a safe address for the delivery of a
“SIMM” card. She had
not intended the bill to go to the elderly gentleman, but when it did arrive in
the sum of £133.14 he realised he had been deceived and was very
upset. This offence was committed
whilst she was on probation for other offences of dishonesty.
Count 2: The defendant claimed she was separated
from her husband from 5th May, 1995, when in fact she separated from
him on 8th August, 1996.
She forged a letter from him to Social Security and forged his signature
on a subsequent form in order to obtain the allowance.
Count 3: The defendant claimed family allowance
over a period of 15 months, illegally receiving approximately
£4,000. She had gone to quite
complicated lengths to provide the false information and to ensure she was able
to intercept any mail sent to her husband.
Details of Mitigation:
Defendant had two
daughters aged 4 and 7. Defence
counsel expressed her remorse.
Psychological report prepared as an addendum to the psychological report
prepared at sentencing in 1996.
Noted that she was well aware of the illegality of her actions and had a
strategy of dangerous risk taking in the hope of not being discovered. Report noted her considerable powers of
persuasion to manipulate persons and noted that if she directed her energies
into legitimate business she could be very successful.
Previous Convictions:
On 20th
December, 1996, the defendant was sentenced to two years’ probation with
180 hours community service in respect of two counts of obtaining money by
false pretences (approximately £3,500) and two counts of false
accounting, all four counts committed against her employer the travel
department of the Co-operative Society.
Conclusions: count 1: 3
months’ imprisonment.
count 2: 9
months’ imprisonment.
count
3: 9 months’ imprisonment.
Counts
2 & 3 to run concurrently with eachother, but to follow consecutively count
1.
Breach
of Probation Order:
count
1: 9 months’ imprisonment.
count
2: 9 months’ imprisonment.
count
3: 9 months’ imprisonment.
count
4: 9 months’ imprisonment.
count
5: 9 months’ imprisonment.
count
6: 9 months’ imprisonment.
Concurrent
with eachother and with counts 2 & 3 of indictment, but consecutive to
count 1.
TOTAL
SENTENCE: 12 months’ imprisonment.
Sentence and Observations of
the Court:
2 years Probation,
150 hours Community Service to be completed within 12 months. (Previous Probation Order now expired,
but offences committed when it was current). The Court said it wished to make it
clear to the defendant that she deserved to go to prison. She had abused the trust and friendship
of an elderly man at a time when on probation. The wrongful claims for family allowance
aggravated by the forged documents.
In the ordinary course of events she would be sentenced to a prison
term. It was only the existence of
her two young children and the knowledge that no other members of the family
were willing or able to care for them which spared her a prison sentence. The Court warned her in future to think
of the interests of her children because if there is a next time, she will
receive a prison sentence and the children will be punished even more than
herself.
Mrs.
S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.
Advocate
A. Messervy for the accused.
JUDGMENT
THE
BAILIFF: Mrs. Horgan, we wish to make it clear to you that you deserve to go
to prison. You abused the trust and
friendship of an elderly man at a time when you were on probation for other offences
of dishonesty. Your deceit over a
period of time and the lengths to which you went to pull the wool over the eyes
of the Employment and Social Security Department aggravated the offences which
you have committed and in the ordinary course of events we have little doubt
that we would be sentencing you to a prison term. The only factor which has tipped the
scales in your favour and against a custodial sentence being imposed is the
existence of your two small children, aged 7 and 4. Because we accept what your counsel has
told us that there are no other members of your family willing or able to care
for them in your absence and because a prison sentence would therefore mean
their being placed in care we are going to put you on probation.
We hope that in the future you will think of the
interests of your children in the way in which you conduct your life because if
there is a next time - and we hope very much that there will not be a next time
- it is likely that you will receive a prison sentence and you will punish your
children even more than you punish yourself.
We are going to place you on probation on each of the
counts to which you have pleaded guilty this afternoon for a period of two
years, subject to the usual provisions that you be of good behaviour and live
and work as directed by your Probation Officer and subject to the additional
condition that you perform 150 hours of Community Service to the satisfaction
of the Community Service organiser and those hours will be completed within 12 months. So far as the other offences committed
in 1996 are concerned we are going to make no further Order.
Authorities.
Whelan: “Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of
Jersey”: pp.54-55.
Whelan: “Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior
Courts of Jersey”:
Noter
Up: 1996-1997: pp. 21-23.
A.G. -v- Halsall (9th December, 1996)
Jersey Unreported.
A.G. -v- Harris (27th March, 1997) Jersey
Unreported.
Livingstone Stewart & Ors (1987) 9 Cr.App.R.(S)
135.
A.G. -v- Godwin (30th October, 1998)
Jersey Unreported.
A.G. -v- Horgan (20th December, 1996)
Jersey Unreported.
McMeiken -v- A.G. (25th July, 1994) Jersey
Unreported.
Whitehead (1996) 1 Cr.App.R.(S) 111.