R v Day (Jason Paul) (2010)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE PILL |
| Judgment Date | 25 January 2010 |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] EWCA Crim 126 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No: 200904683/A3 |
| Date | 25 January 2010 |
[2010] EWCA Crim 126
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION
Before: Lord Justice Pill
Mr Justice Bennett
Mr Justice Field
No: 200904683/A3
Miss E Verity appeared on behalf of the Applicant
Mr A Collins appeared on behalf of the Crown
: On 26th June 2009 in the Crown Court at Canterbury, Jason Paul Day, pleaded guilty before Her Honour Judge Williams to an offence under section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He had been charged with section 18 at a trial conducted by a different judge. The jury were unable to agree. Thereupon, on rearrangement he pleaded guilty to section 20. We are told by Miss Verity of counsel, and we accept, that, in March 2009, before the trial, a plea to section 20 had been offered and offered on the basis on which it was subsequently accepted.
On 7th August 2009 Judge Williams sentenced Day to an extended sentence, 6 years pursuant to section 227 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. That was made up of a custodial term of 4 years’ imprisonment (with a direction under section 240 that 158 days spent on remand should count towards the sentence). An extension period, that is an extended period of licence, of 2 years was ordered giving the total of 6 years.
The application for leave to appeal against sentence has been referred to the court by the Registrar. The court has granted leave to appeal. On the evening of 25th August 2008 the complainant was at her home with the appellant, who was her former partner. The evening was proceeding smoothly until about 9.30 pm when the appellant's attitude changed completely and he demanded money from her. She said she did not owe him any money. At about 10.00 pm, in the kitchen, the kettle was turned on by the complainant. Her evidence was that while the kettle was boiling the appellant continued to shout at her, demanding money. He then picked up the kettle and poured water over her right shoulder. She felt excruciating pain and contacted a friend. Thereupon the appellant's attitude changed and he was acting as if nothing had happened.
When interviewed he said he had not poured water over her, she had been trying to stab him with a knife and had picked up the kettle to pour water over him. In the ensuing struggle the water had gone over her when she slipped.
The basis of plea on which the judge sentenced was that in the course of the argument the water was boiling and the appellant had hold of the kettle. In the course of the struggle the water was poured over the complainant: he did not intend to pour water over her, nor to cause the injuries that she received. He accepted, however, that he was responsible for them and that during the struggle he was able to foresee that such an injury could be caused. We have seen photographs of the injury, both to the front of her body and on the upper part of her back. There was serious damage. We are told that there is no serious scarring left but there is irregularity of the skin.
In her sentencing remarks the judge put the offence in this way:
“I deal with you on your basis of plea to recklessly causing the grievous bodily harm to your partner… by pouring boiling water over her during a struggle between the two of you.”
The judge referred to the “bad record” of the appellant:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Re Ad & Am (Fact-Finding hearing) (Application for re-hearing)
...medical evidence that the proper conclusion of the factual enquiry is that the injury to AD has an "unknown cause" (see R v Henderson [2010] EWCA Crim 126 by Moses LJ, and see Hedley J in Re R (Care proceedings: Causation) [2011] EWHC 1715 (Fam)); v) There are "question marks over Dr Fairhu......
-
A County Council v AB and Others
...the possibility that F's death resulted from an unknown organic cause as emphasised by Moses LJ in R v. Henderson, Butler & Oyediran [2010] EWCA Crim 126 and Hedley J in Re R (Care Proceedings: Causation) [2011] EWHC 1715 (Fam). In the latter case, Hedley J observed: "there has to be factor......
-
A Local Authority v A Mother (1st Respondent) GM (2nd Respondent) DA (3rd Respondent) AA (by her children's guardian) (4th Respondent)
...in any case, the possibility of the unknown cause. The possibility was articulated by Moses LJ in R v Henderson-Butler and Oyediran [2010] EWCA Crim. 126 at paragraph 1: "Where the prosecution is able, by advancing an array of experts, to identify a non-accidental injury and the defence can......
-
Stockport MBC (Applicant) AM (1st Respondent) Dt (2nd Respondent) L & K (Infants) (by their children's guardian) (3rd Respondent) SM, LS, T & E (by the Official Solicitor) (Interveners) Stockport MBC (Applicant) SM (1st Respondent) and and Another (2nd Respondent) and and Another (3rd Respondent)
...any given case the possibility of the unknown cause and to the decision of Lord Justice Moses in R v Henderson and Butler and others [2010] EWCA Crim. 126 [1] " Where a prosecution is able, by advancing an array of experts, to identify a non-accidental injury and the defence can identify no......