The Chief Constable, Tayside Police V. Robert Basterfield
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Sheriff L.D.R. Foulis |
| Court | Sheriff Court |
| Date | 03 September 2007 |
| Docket Number | B143/06 |
| Published date | 05 September 2007 |
Perth, 3rd September 2007,
The Sheriff, having resumed consideration of the cause, finds the following facts admitted or proved :-
1. The Pursuer is Chief Constable of Tayside Police, the police force of the administrative region of Tayside comprising the present local government areas of Angus, Dundee, and Perth and Kinross. The force has its administrative headquarters at West Bell Street, Dundee.
2. Part of the area of the Pursuer's police force lies within the Sheriffdom of Tayside Central and Fife at Perth. The Defender resides at Flat A, 89, Scott Street, Perth. This is within the Sheriffdom. Accordingly in terms of section 112(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, this court has jurisdiction. No agreement exists between the parties prorogating jurisdiction in respect of the present cause to another court and no other proceedings are pending between the parties in respect of the subject matter of the present application.
3. The Defender was born on 8th December 1971 in Perth, Western Australia. He moved to the United Kingdom on 8th January 2003.
4. Between 1989 and 2000 the Defender was convicted on eight occasions of various offences in Australia. These offences varied from crimes of violence to driving offences. As a result of said convictions, the Defender received penalties ranging from nine months imprisonment and numerous fines to probation. None of these offences contained a sexual element.
5. In particular, on 15th December 1998 the Defender used a hammer to damage a motor vehicle belonging to Channel Nine, a television company in Australia. He deliberately swerved the vehicle he was driving into the path of the other motor vehicle, and chased male employees of said company with a knife with a twenty centimetre blade. The Defender subsequently told police officers that he had a grievance with the media and that he was hearing voices through the media. He wished to speak to someone with that company. As a result of being convicted of charges arising from said incident, the Defender was prohibited from contacting employees of that television company or entering their premises for a period.
6. On 18th November 2004 around 11.30am the Defender followed Victoria Keiro, 3, Old Mill Courtyard, Bridge of Earn from Main Street, Bridge of Earn to her home. He followed her through the entry door to the property in which her home was situated and pushed open the front door of her home. As a result of M/s Keiro's dog barking, the Defender was startled and she was able to push him from her house. M/s Keiro was hysterical as a result of the Defender's behaviour. As a result of this incident she no longer likes to go out alone nor answers her door unless she knows who is there. M/s Keiro was in her mid twenties at the time of this incident.
7. As a result of behaving in the foregoing manner, the Defender appeared on summary complaint in Perth Sheriff Court. On 11th March 2005, after sundry procedure in respect of this complaint, the Defender was convicted of breach of the peace. As a result of this conviction, the Defender was placed on the sex offenders register in terms of section 92(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the court having determined that there was a significant sexual aspect to the Defender's behaviour in committing said offence.
8. The said offence constitutes an offence within paragraph 60 of Schedule 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
9. As a result of said conviction, on 20th December 2006 the Defender was made the subject of a probation order lasting three years. This order was made in terms of section 228 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 and it contained a number of additional conditions namely:-
(a) The Defender should attend any sexual offending programme that his supervising officer deems appropriate.
(b) The Defender participates in any sexual offending programme to a degree acceptable to his supervising officer.
(c) The Defender is not alone with or in the company of a lone female without her expressed consent.
(d) The Defender does not take up employment, voluntary work, or any recreational activity without notifying his supervising officer.
(e) The Defender should attend for any psychiatric or psychological assessment that his supervising officer deems necessary or appropriate.
The order was and is subject to regular review in terms of section 229A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.
10. As at April 2007, the Defender has complied with the terms of said probation order.
11. Prior to 18th November 2004 the Defender attended M/s Keiro's place of employment to enquire about a mobile phone. He was abusive when he left the premises.
12. Following the Defender being placed on the sex offenders register with effect from 11th March 2005, sex offenders risk assessment officers from the Pursuer's force kept in regular contact with the Defender. The officers carried out a risk assessment on the Defender in December 2005. They determined that the Defender constituted a high risk of reconviction.
13. Said risk assessment has been reviewed by officers on an ongoing basis. The Defender has always been assessed as constituting at least a high risk of reoffending. On 19th July 2006, officers carried out a further Sex Offender Risk assessment in accordance with the Risk Matrix 2000. This assessed the Defender as constituting a very high risk. In terms of the action plan in said assessment, the Defender was to be visited monthly and re assessed in three months. His activities regarding employment and involvement with Letham and St Mark's Church were to be monitored. In November 2006 a further assessment was again carried out in accordance with the Risk Matrix 2000. This assessed the Defender as still constituting a very high risk of reoffending.
14. On 19th and 21st July 2005 the Defender was in the North Inch, Perth around midnight. He was on his own and carried a rucksack containing clothing and a towel.
15. In early September 2005 Maria Dominguez, a Spanish national, came to Perth where she undertook a course in English at Perth College. She was aged twenty five years of age. She obtained part time employment at Bells Sports Centre, Perth where she worked as a catering assistant from that time. Bells Sports Centre is adjacent to the North Inch.
16. In the early evening of 18th February 2006 M/s Dominguez left Bells Sports Centre on her own. The Defender joined her and walked with her. In the course of conversation he invited her to come to his house and asked if he could accompany her. M/s Dominguez declined his invitation. The Defender made efforts to take hold of her hand and repeatedly placed his arm around her shoulders. He continually ignored her pleas to leave her alone and to stop what he was doing. The Defender attempted to push M/s Dominguez towards a grass area on the North Inch which was in darkness.
17. M/s Dominguez started to run from the Defender in Atholl Street, Perth. The Defender chased after her as she tried to get away from him. He stopped her and did not let her past. He attempted to show her videos on his mobile telephone and asked her for her telephone number. M/s Dominguez again started to run and the Defender ran after her. In Charlotte Place, the Defender stopped her again and asked her to come home with him. She asked him to leave her.
18. M/s Dominguez then walked along Skinnergate, and into High Street, Perth. The Defender still followed her. By this stage M/s Dominguez was very upset. She attempted to gain entry to a friend's house for help. At this point the Defender left her.
19. A short time later, M/s Dominguez, unable to summon her friend, walked along High Street, Watergate, and Edinburgh Road to her home in South Inch Park, Perth. The Defender was in the vicinity of the Ferguson Gallery, adjacent to the South Inch, but did not see her.
20. As a result of the Defender's behaviour towards M/s Dominguez on 18th February 2006, she was terrified of him. M/s Dominguez abandoned her course and left Scotland.
21. At the time of acting in the foregoing manner, the Defender was on bail, the order having been imposed on 19th November 2004 in Perth Sheriff Court in respect of the incident involving M/s Keiro. Sentence had further been deferred upon him for the Defender to be of good behaviour until 31st May 2006 in relation to the incident on 18th November 2004.
22. As a result of behaving in the foregoing manner towards M/s Dominguez, the Defender appeared on summary complaint in Perth Sheriff Court and on 4th July 2006 the Defender was convicted of breach of the peace. As a result of this conviction the Defender was placed on the sex offenders register in terms of section 92(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the court again having determined that there was a significant sexual aspect to the Defender's behaviour in committing said offence. On 26th July 2006 the Defender was sentenced to four months imprisonment in respect of this offence. The Defender appealed said sentence without success.
23. As a result of the said convictions and the resultant penalties imposed, the Defender will remain subject to registration in terms of section 92(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 until 2013.
24. From the summer of 2005 until May 2006 the Defender was a member of Perthshire Rugby Club. His nickname within the club was 'Crazy Rob.' He often attended Bells Sports Centre, Perth after rugby matches. On a few occasions the Defender left the premises at the same time as lone females who had been present in the bar. After concerns were raised as to the Defender's said behaviour, if the Defender left at the same time as a lone female, a club member would follow him.
25. The Defender regularly had hard core pornographic publications in his possession when attending rugby training or travelling to rugby matches with the club. At...
To continue reading
Request your trial