STATE OF TASMANIA v JAMES QUENTIN JONES 12 DECEMBER 2023
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE JAGO J
Mr Jones, you have been found guilty by a jury of one count of Criminal Code assault. You were found not guilty of the crime of attempting to commit rape. The jury were given a principle Crown witness direction. The most logical conclusion is that the jury were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt based on the evidence of the complainant alone, but where that evidence was corroborated by independent objective evidence, such as in this instance medical and photographic evidence, the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and prepared to act on her evidence. That determination is consistent with how the complainant presented in her evidence at trial. She freely admitted to having difficulty in recalling some of the events that occurred on the night. I am satisfied that was because of a combination of the effects of the passage of time, her consumption of alcohol and the trauma of the incident. It is, of course, my task to find facts for sentencing purposes consistent with the jury verdicts. I may only make findings adverse to you if satisfied beyond reasonable doubt they have been proved, and I may only make findings of fact in your favour if they are proved on the balance of probabilities. As noted, the jury must have accepted the complainant’s account where it was corroborated by other evidence. I will sentence on the basis of the complainant’s account. My impression of her was that she was an honest witness. There were issues pertaining to her reliability. Those issues, in respect to the assault charge, are resolved by the corroborative evidence.
On 22 August 2020, you made arrangements to collect the complainant from her residence. You had been talking with the complainant via social media for some weeks. During that time, the complainant had been in hospital following a serious fall. She had broken both of her feet. When you collected her she was still unable to walk or put pressure on her feet and she was wearing a moon boot on each foot. You, in fact, had to carry her to and from your vehicle.
After you collected her, you both went to your home. You had previously purchased alcohol to share with the complainant that evening. I am satisfied that during the evening the complainant consumed a considerable quantity of alcohol. You also consumed alcohol but not to the same extent as her. Because the complainant could not walk, you would bring her alcoholic drinks to her.
During the evening, the two of you were listening to music and engaging in conversation. One of the topics of conversation was about a female named Clare. Clare was the partner of the complainant’s ex-husband. You had had an affair with Clare, which had ended shortly prior to this evening. At one point, you showed the complainant semi-naked photographs of Clare that you had on your phone. As the conversation about Clare continued, the complainant observed you to become more aggressive and agitated.
As the evening went on, and the complainant became more intoxicated she began to dance. She removed her moon boots and danced on her knees in the lounge room. She also removed parts of her clothing. She was dancing in a manner that some may consider provocative. You recorded the complainant dancing on your mobile phone. That footage was tendered on the trial. Having watched it and heard it, I am satisfied that you were encouraging the complainant to dance in the manner she was and made some sexually suggestive comments to her.
After a time, the complainant suggested she was ready to go. She gathered some of her clothing and put her moon boots back on. You responded aggressively. The complainant came to be lying on her back on the lounge room floor. You assaulted her by slapping her and kicking her. At one point, you held her hands above her head and leaned over her. I am satisfied that at one point you were positioned between the complainant’s legs because she had a clear recall of them being over-extended and feeling pain from her recent injuries and inability to use her legs. You were verbally abusing the complainant throughout the assault, calling her a “waste of space” and a “fucking bitch”. At one point you used your foot to stomp on her chest, around her sternum area. You slapped her to the face. You also placed both hands around her neck and squeezed. By that point, the complainant was quite frantic and fearful and believed that she was going to die. She had trouble breathing and felt dizzy.
Eventually, you left the immediate vicinity of the complainant and she was able to get away from you. She crawled on her hands and knees through the sliding door of your residence, out onto the nature strip and to a neighbouring home two doors down to seek assistance. The desperation of her having to do so is indicative of the trauma she experienced. The complainant told the neighbour you had assaulted her and complained of sore ribs and difficulty in breathing. The neighbour noticed injuries to her face. Whilst the complainant was with the neighbour you attended there and threw the complainant’s mobile phone onto the nature strip outside. It was disdainful behaviour.
Police were called and the complainant was subsequently taken to hospital. She had tenderness to her forehead, and a number of areas of bruising and swelling around her face including a significantly bruised left eye, a bruise on her right cheek, a bruise on the right side of her forehead, scratches and bruising to her left cheek. She also had a number of bruises, scratches and abrasions to her arms, torso and back and bruises and scratches around both knee areas, probably consistent with having to crawl from your home. There was significant bruising to her upper arms consistent with having been grabbed and held. Her sternum area was very tender and painful and subsequent examination revealed it was fractured. There were injuries to her elbow and to the knuckles of her hands. The extent of the injuries were consistent with the assault described by the complainant, and inconsistent in my view, with your claim that you had simply picked up the complainant and deposited her outside your unit when her behaviour became unacceptable to you.
It seems the physical injuries resolved without the need for further medical intervention. I have received an impact statement from her which sets out the serious and ongoing psychological and emotional effects of the conduct she experienced at your hands. What she describes is consistent with the fear, indignity and confusion one might expect from a crime of this nature. Your conduct towards her left her with feelings of shame, fear and sadness. She continues to experience nightmares.
You are 48 years of age. You work as a truck driver and plant operator. You have one child from a previous relationship with whom you maintain a good relationship. You have significant literacy issues but have always been able to maintain labour based employment. You own your own home which is subject to a mortgage. You have a number of relevant prior convictions. You have prior convictions for assaulting and resisting a police officer. In 2000, you were sentenced by this Court to a three month period of imprisonment, wholly suspended, for one count of Criminal Code assault. In 2012 you were convicted of common assault and breaches of a police family violence order and family violence order. You again received a suspended sentence of imprisonment. In September 2020 you were convicted of common assault. For that matter, you were fined. Additionally, you have prior convictions for drug offences, escape from custody, firearm offences, matters of dishonesty and driving offences. It could hardly be said that you present before the Court as a person of prior good character. I note the various character references that were tendered to the Court. They certainly attest to your value as an employee and your amiable disposition, but they make no reference to this crime or indeed your criminal history, and do not address good character in the sense that is relevant to sentencing.
I have received a home detention assessment report. You maintained to the author of that report the version of events you claimed at trial. You have demonstrated no acceptance of responsibility nor insight into the seriousness of your criminal behaviour and have displayed no remorse. Indeed, you seemed to suggest to the author of the report that you had been victimised by being made to answer before a court for your behaviour. You told the author of the report that you were not willing to be subject to home detention or perform community service as it would impose limitations upon your employment opportunities.
There are a number of very serious aspects to your behaviour. The force you applied to the complainant’s sternum must have been significant to cause the fracture. That affected her breathing. The pressure you applied to her throat also affected her breathing. Those acts are particularly concerning. Your behaviour could easily have resulted in serious injury or even death, even if such was completely unintended. Your assault upon her was quite a persistent and frenzied attack. She was trying to defend herself by kicking out with her moon boots but you were not deterred. She was vulnerable. Her injuries meant she was unable to walk or bear pressure upon her feet. She was limited in what she could do to escape from you. Her intoxication also made her vulnerable, and you knew how much she had had to drink because you were suppling her with her alcohol. Ultimately, she was required to endure the humiliation of fleeing the scene partly dressed and crawling to a neighbour’s residence to seek help. Your behaviour involved a breach of trust given you had collected the complainant and taken her to your home for a social evening knowing her physical limitations.
You are not entitled to the benefit of a plea of guilty. Violence of this nature must be condemned and punished by the courts in an endeavour to dissuade others from behaving in a similar fashion. General deterrence and denunciation are primary sentencing considerations. I am also satisfied, given your history and lack of insight into the severity of your behaviour, that personal deterrence is an important consideration. There is very little which mitigates your criminal conduct. The only possible sentence given you are not prepared to participate in a home detention order, is a period of imprisonment. I have given careful consideration to the question of whether I ought to suspend any part of that sentence. You have received the benefit of suspended sentences in the past. They have not been successful in encouraging you to become a law abiding member of our community in the long term. I think you require the harsh reality of serving a period of imprisonment to appreciate that behaviour such as yours is simply unacceptable and will be punished.
You are convicted of the crime of assault. You are sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. The question of parole eligibility does not arise given the length of the sentence.