Committal for Contempt of Court: Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council -v- Archer
Case Number: K00BH764
In the County Court at Bournemouth
7 March 2025
Before:
District Judge Fentem
Between:
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council
-v-
Archer
Order
District Judge Fentem:
1. Mr Archer, you have pleaded guilty to 22 breaches of the injunction made by District Judge Powell on 28 February 2024. It was served on you on 1 March 2024. Of those, you pleaded guilty to 21 breaches on 14 February this year, when District Judge Bridger deferred sentencing for six months. He noted that in his opinion the custody threshold was met, and I am told that he indicated in a non-binding fashion that a 2 month sentence was appropriate for the breaches before him. But he also ordered that sentencing should be brought forward if you breached the anti-social behaviour injunction in the period before sentencing.
2. Earlier this week you pleaded guilty to another breach committed on 1 March 2025. I am now going to sentence you for the breaches, for the breach admitted to me. I will bring forward the sentencing for the breaches admitted to DJ Bridger.
3. I remind myself that the objective of sentencing is based on three principles, of ensuring future compliance with the order, punishment, and rehabilitation.
4. In Her Majesty’s Attorney General v Crosland [2021] UKSC 15; [2021] 4 WLR 103 the Supreme Court said that I should assess the seriousness of the contempt by reference to culpability and the harm caused. In light of that determination I must consider first whether a fine would be a sufficient penalty. But if the contempt is so serious that only a custodial penalty will suffice, I must impose the shortest period of imprisonment that properly reflects the seriousness of the contempt. I have to give due weight of course to matters in mitigation such as genuine remorse and previous positive character. But I must also give due weight to the impact of committal on persons other than the contemnor, such as children and vulnerable adults. There should be a reduction for an early guilty plea. Although Crosland is a criminal contempt case it is plainly relevant.
5. My powers are to: make no order, impose a fine, adjourn the consideration, or impose an immediate or suspended order for committal to prison. The maximum term of imprisonment that I may impose today for all of the breaches together is 2 years. Custody should of course be reserved only for the most serious breaches and to less serious cases where other means to securing compliance have failed. I should consider a penalty for the breaches admitted but must also look at the totality of all those penalties.
6. I adopt the approach to sentencing described by the Court of Appeal in Lovett v Wigan Borough Council [2022] EWCA Civ 1631; [2023] 1 WLR 1443.
7. The order prohibited you from, among other things, the following:
a) Acting in a manner causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. That was paragraph 1.
b) Being in possession of illegal drugs, drugs paraphernalia or other prohibited substance in any place members of the public had access to. That was what the first paragraph 7 said.
c) Begging or soliciting for alms from members of the public, that is the second paragraph 7.
d) Loitering or being within ten metres of commercial or business premises for the purposes of soliciting for alms, begging: the first paragraph 8.
e) You had to immediately leave any place, area or location when asked by a CSAS, PSO, police officer or another person who appears to have authority over that place and not to return for 48 hours. That was the second paragraph 8.
f) You were prohibited from being in any place or places you were banned from. That was paragraph 9.
g) In particular you were required not to be in or to enter Castlepoint, Castle Lane or Bournemouth town centre. It was shown on the maps that were attached to the order. That was paragraph 10.
h) You were also required to work with support services provided by ACS: paragraph 11.
8. Almost immediately after the injunction was made, you breached it, by your own admission. You then repeatedly breached it over a considerable period of time, although with some few breaks in the pattern. There has been a recent and worrying escalation in the severity of the breaches.
9. You admitted the following breaches. I will include all of the breaches set out by the council in order to keep the numbering clear:
a) On 11 March 2024 at 16:26 hours, the Defendant contrary to the terms of his injunction order, was seen begging from members of the public in Castlepoint. He was briefly detained by staff and released not long afterward. Later that same day at 20:18 hours, the Defendant was seen within the exclusion zone outside Asda, Castlepoint. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
b) On 12th March 2024 at 17:56 hours, the Defendant was again seen loitering outside Asda, Castlepoint which is within the exclusion zone. This is in breach of paragraphs 8 and 10 of the order.
c) On 16 March 2024 at 20:02 hours the Defendant was seen loitering outside Sainsbury, Castlepoint within the exclusion zone. This is in breach of paragraphs 8 and 10 of the order.
d) On 27 May 2024 at 12:37 hours, the Defendant was seen approaching and begging from members of the public outside Greggs in Commercial Road, Bournemouth Town Centre. A CSAS officer witnessed the incident and approached the Defendant and asked not to loiter in front of shops; the Defendant agreed and moved on towards the Triangle. The Defendant was with another male at the time. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
e) On 9 September 2024 at 1415 hours, the Defendant, contrary to the terms of his injunction order, was seen begging in Old Christchurch Road opposite McDonald. The Defendant begged from an off-duty Police officer saying, “HAVE YOU GOT ANY CHANGE?”. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
f) On 4th December 2024 at approximately 1800 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order caused alarm and distress to members of the public by being intoxicated and lying in the road in Lymington Road, Christchurch, members of the public had to physically remove him from the road. This is in breach of paragraph 1 of the order.
g) Count 7 was withdrawn. I mention it here only to make sure that the record is accurate.
h) On 22nd December 2024 at 15:42 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was observed aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park while they were putting items in their cars. He refused to move away and leave site when asked by security staff. This is in breach of paragraphs 1, 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
i) 26th December 2024 at 16:05 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was observed aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park while they were putting items in their cars. He refused to move away and leave site when asked by security staff. This is in breach of paragraphs 1, 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
j) On 27th December 2024 at 17:05 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was observed aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park while they were putting items in their cars. He refused to move away and leave site when asked by security staff. This is in breach of paragraphs 1, 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
k) On 31st December 2024 at 14:43 and 15:37 hours respectively, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was observed aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park while they were putting items in their cars. He refused to move away and leave site when asked by security staff. This is in breach of paragraphs 1, 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
l) 2nd January 2025 at 10:37; 10:56; 14:46 and 17:30 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was observed aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park while they were putting items in their cars. He refused to move away and leave site when asked by security staff. This is in breach of paragraphs 1, 7, 8 and 10 of the order.
m) On 3rd January 2025 at 16:56 hours, the Defendant was seen begging from members of the public at Castlepoint shopping Centre. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the order.
n) On 4th January 2025 at 23:48 hours, the Defendant was seen at Madeira Car Park, Bournemouth Town Centre being an area he is excluded from in breach of paragraph 10 of his injunction order. He was escorted back to his home address at Room 1, 260 Lymington Road, Christchurch.
o) On 14 January 2025 in the early hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was seen trying van handles in Exeter Road car park, Bournemouth Town Centre within his area of exclusion. This is in breach of paragraphs 9 and 10 of his injunction order.
p) On 22 January 2025 at 1430 hours, the Defendant was again seen in Christchurch Road, Bournemouth Town Centre. He looked unwell and was reluctant to engage with his ASC support worker and a Police officer both of whom were trying to assist the Defendant. He was taken to BCP Council for assistance with housing, but he stated he was too unwell to speak with them. This is in breach of paragraphs 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the order.
q) On 22 January 2025 at Castlepoint Shopping Centre the Defendant in breach of his ASBI was observed to be aggressively begging from members of the public in Castlepoint shopping park, members of the public felt harassed by the Defendant. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the order.
r) On 27 January 2025 at 1845 hours, the Defendant was seen begging from members of the public outside Asda and on the West Mall of Castlepoint Shopping Centre. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the order.
s) On 30 January 2025 at 20:25 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was seen outside ASDA Castlepoint begging from members of the public. The Defendant approached a plain cloth Police Officer saying “I’M HOMELESS AND NEED A PLACE TO STAY” at which another officer responded and reminded the Defendant that he was not supposed to be in Castlepoint, that he should leave or be arrested. The Defendant left and ran off in the direction of Castle Lane East. This is in breach of paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the order.
t) On 30th January 2025 at approximately 0040 hours, the Defendant in breach of his injunction order trying car door handles in Wooton Gardens, Old Christchurch Road Bournemouth Town Centre. This is in breach of paragraphs 9 and 10 of his order.
u) On 1st February 2025 at 23:30 hours, the defendant in breach of his injunction order was seen crouched down behind a car (hiding from the Police on patrol). He was at his instance escorted back to his mother’s address. This is in breach of paragraphs 8,9 and 10 of the Order.
v) On 9th February 2025 at 02:15 hours the Defendant breached his injunction order by entering and being in Bournemouth Town Centre, being in possession of items not his own and being in possession of heroin in a public place. This is in breach of paragraphs 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the order.
w) On 1st March 2025 at 13:55 hours the Defendant in breach of his injunction order was seen injecting drugs at the bin sheds at Curlew Road, Bournemouth. Police attended and upon search recovered Class A drugs and drug paraphernalia from the Defendant. This is a breach of paragraphs 1, 6 and 7 of the order.
10. I have read all of the statements attached to the original contempt application from January of this year and the statement of PC Jonathon dated 1 March 2025.
11. In terms of aggravation the following factors are aggravating. You breached the injunction within ten days of it being served on you. You breached the injunction after the committal application was served on you, and indeed after the sentencing was adjourned on the understanding that you would attempt to comply with the injunction by District Judge Bridger. There are, as that list I have just read out indicates, a very, very large number of breaches spread out over almost the entire period for which the injunction has been active.
12. I accept of course that there are periods when there appears to have been no activity in breach. But some of the breaches are particularly concerning as they were likely to cause or threaten to cause mental or other harm to members of the public. In particular I note the witness statement given by the security personnel at Castlepoint shopping centre in which Mr Scott indicated that you were aggressively begging habitually to more vulnerable members of the public such as elderly women on their own and mothers with young children.
13. In terms of mitigation I have already indicated that I can see there are some gaps in what appears to be a pattern and I am told that one of the reasons for the apparent trio of renewed breach in November/December of last year was because your brother, to whom you were very close, was very sadly murdered six years ago in the November and as a consequence November is a month which may trigger a breakdown or other mental distress in you.
14. I take into account that you are a vulnerable person, you do have a lot of engagement with, or attempted engagement, with Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council who have attempted from what I have been told today to assist you for a number of years. You have an adult social care social worker who assists you. So, you are a vulnerable person.
15. You are presently at my order remanded in custody. Since being remanded in custody you have been on a methadone script, on a dose of ten milligrams originally which has been increased slowly. It will increase to 40 milligrams slowly as part of the detoxication process. I am told and quite accept that you are engaging with the detoxication programme. That gives me some confidence.
16. I should sentence for each of the breaches individually but I will group them. I will group them by number.
a) Breaches 1 to 5 and 14 and 16 appear to me to be category 3 culpability C breaches. That is to say comparatively minor breaches causing little or no harm or distress. I make no order on each of them.
b) Breach 6, to remind you that is the breach which involves you being intoxicated and lying in the road in Lymington Road in Christchurch, is more serious. You were drunk and lying in the middle of the road, obviously likely to cause distress to members of the public. I take into account that you were intoxicated and the suggestion is that that is drunk rather than having ingested illegal drugs. But it does seem to me that at this stage we reach a category 2 level of offence with culpability C. The starting point is adjourned consideration with a range of up to 1 month. There had been by this stage a repeated breach of the order and multiple failures to comply with it. The custody threshold seems to me to have been met. It is a sufficiently serious offence in light of the repeated breach and the police involvement on the day and I sentence you for that offence to 7 days’ imprisonment.
c) Breaches 8 to 12, 13 and 17 to 19 involved repeated aggressive begging in Castlepoint shopping centre and refusal to leave when asked to do so. Plainly it was likely to cause distress. The evidence of Mr Scott, the security supervisor, suggests that there was a deliberate targeting of vulnerable customers. It seems to me that these breaches each reach the category 2 culpability B mark with a starting point for my consideration of 1 month, with a range from an adjourned consideration to 3 months. Taking into account mitigating and aggravating factors I will sentence you to 30 days for each of those breaches to run concurrently with one another and with the sentence I have already passed for breach number 6.
d) Breaches 15 and 20 again involved serious breaches of the injunction in that not only were you in the exclusion zone but, much more importantly, you were attempting to see if you could break into cars. In fact little harm was done by each of those events because there is no suggestion that you did in fact manage to steal any goods. Nevertheless, the intention remains significant and I consider that category 2 culpability B is the appropriate band for those breaches. That is a starting point of 1 month and a range from adjourned consideration to 3 months. I will sentence you to 14 days’ imprisonment for each breach, to run concurrently with one another and with the other sentences that I have passed.
e) Breach 21, which was hiding behind the car in the exclusion zone, is not sufficiently serious to merit a sentence and I make no order in respect of that breach.
f) Breaches 22 and 23 are of a different magnitude and different type. Both involve being in possession of Class A drugs in a public place. The ingestion of Class A drugs is the cause of not just the antisocial behaviour injunction itself but – from what I have been told today – the problems that you are suffering and your criminality generally ranging from being in Castlepoint to the aggressive begging and the attempts to enter into cars. The purpose of doing all of that is in order to obtain Class A or other prohibited substances. Therefore breaches 22 and 23 are considerably more serious. Nevertheless, they are within a category 2 culpability B range. I do not need to remind myself of the starting point and the ending point. It seems to me, taking in account everything I have said, that it is not appropriate to remain at the starting point for that range. A higher sentence is appropriate. I sentence you to 60 days imprisonment, which is an appropriate sentence for breaches 22 and 23. Both sentences are to run concurrently with one another and with all of the other sentences.
17. So, taking all of that in the round there is a sentence of 60 days in total for all of the offences, because all of the sentences are running concurrent. I look at the totality of that sentence and am satisfied that that total sentence of 60 days properly conforms to the principles of sentencing and to the seriousness of the offences.
18. You pled guilty at the first possible opportunity. For the council Mrs Cole says that nevertheless you went on to breach the order. But credit for a guilty plea is, among other things, an encouragement to ensure that public funds are not wasted, that public time is not wasted, and that victims are not put through the procedure of having to come to court in order to give evidence in distressing circumstances. Those are among the reasons why credit should be given for a guilty plea.
19. I will give the usual one third credit for guilty plea, so that is 20 days credit reducing the sentence to 40 days.
20. I should also give credit for the time spent on remand. You have spent 6 days on remand, Mr Archer. Now as the current policy for the next 12 months or so is to release prisoners on licence after 40% of the sentence is served, this equates to credit of another 15 days in prison.
21. So that is a total of 25 days in prison. That is the sentence that I pass.
22. I must then consider whether the sentence should be suspended. This is, from what I have been told today, the first occasion upon which you have been sentenced for breaching this order. There is no indication in your lengthy prior convictions list that you have been sentenced for something directly similar to this, i.e. contempt of court, before.
23. Nevertheless, there is, as I have just indicated, a lengthy sequence of crimes. However, it seems to me that custody being the absolute last resort and immediate custody being even more a last resort, I should give you one further opportunity to amend your ways. You have, and I am pleased by this, engaged with the detoxication process in prison. You are about to go onto 40 milligrams of your script.
24. I am going to suspend sentence until the expiry of the anti-social behaviour order at 4pm on 28 February 2026. The suspension is on condition that there are no further breaches, specifically that you comply with paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, both paragraphs 7 and paragraphs 9 and 10 of the order. Paragraph 10 is amended to allow you to enter Castle Point, Castle Lane and Bournemouth Town Centre if you are under the supervision of a social worker or support worker.
25. I am also going to suspend on condition that you keep any appointments with your social worker, Mr Gosling, or any other social worker who is engaged with you.
26. So, if you breach those paragraphs of the injunction again or if you fail to keep appointments with your social worker the sentence that I have given will be triggered.
27. I am going to remind you that you have got a right of appeal against this sentence because it is a custodial sentence. You also have the right to make an application to court to purse your contempt.