DOMESTIC abuse charities want an appeal to be lodged against an “astonishing” and “concerning” sentence handed down in the Royal Court this week and say they fear the court’s decision risks leaving victims with “no faith” in the justice system.
Terence Michael Tremarco (61) was given 456 hours of community service by the court’s Superior Number, which convenes to hear the most serious cases, for repeatedly attacking his former partner during the 1990s.
The prosecution labelled the brutal assaults, which often happened after his wife came back from a night out, “one of the worst cases of enduring domestic violence” seen by Jersey’s courts.
Jersey Domestic Abuse Support services manager Sarah Hamon – whose team of advisers support victims of domestic abuse – said that despite being cautious and knowing that sentences “fluctuate”, the agency was “blind-sided” by the sentence, which she called “astonishing”.
She and Kate Wright, who is soon to start her role as the chief executive of Freeda – formerly the Women’s Refuge – both said they wanted to see an appeal.
Ms Hamon said: “She [the victim] felt very empowered through the process, because she wanted to keep herself safe by speaking out, but also she wanted to impress upon other people that it’s not too late.
“And, unfortunately, she now feels as if the courts had a missed opportunity to set a precedent here.
“The effects of this kind of offending stays with people for their lifetime.”
She added: “Not only does the psychological impact of what’s happened stay with her, but she’s now got to adjust her lifestyle to make sure that she doesn’t bump into this person when they’re serving their community sentence.”
Ms Hamon described “a real sense of unfairness”, adding to the trauma already carried by the woman.
She also pointed out that although the court was told that Tremarco had taken “accountability” for his offending, there was no evidence that he had taken part in any programmes that could improve his behaviour, such as the Probation Service’s Building Healthy Relationships scheme.
Ms Hamon said she was “grateful” for the courts’ work in recent years, but added that “this has taken us so far back in terms of victim confidence, not only for this victim, but for other people who might be considering reporting things that have happened in the past because they’re scared now it’s just not going to happen”.
“People will have no faith,” she said.
Emma Roberts, service manager for Freeda, echoed Ms Hamon’s thoughts, saying the organisation was “deeply concerned that confidence in justice being delivered by our courts will be negatively impacted by this and hope that the independent review into the criminal-justice system will ensure that victims coming forward will be listened to”.
She added: “Freeda’s thoughts and feelings echo that of the wider community, in our shock and disappointment, at the sentencing… we find this difficult to accept or understand and our thoughts are with the victim/survivor and her family.”
Mrs Wright, the chair of the Violence Against Women and Girls Taskforce, said she found it “hard to understand how a non-custodial sentence was arrived at, given the horrific nature of the violence perpetrated over years against this poor woman, even if the perpetrator did plead guilty”.
She said she had been “flooded” with messages, and that the message received by victims was “that abuse and violence against women is not viewed by [the courts] as a serious crime”.
“I do hope the Attorney General appeals it,” she said.
Ms Hamon said JDAS would be looking at the pathway for appealing against the sentence.
