Guilty verdict for thug with 94 previous convictions

Thursday 25 August 2016

A man with 94 previous convictions has been found guilty of a “serious and sustained” assault on a stranger, landing kicks, punches and stamps onto the victim’s head.

The Royal Court today heard Ricky Lee Bree was also caught spitting at police officers who tried to arrest him and threatened them by shouting “I’ve got AIDS.”

Bree was found guilty of grave and criminal assault, larceny and resisting arrest by an Assize jury trial. Jurors voted unanimously on the assault charge, but voted by a 10-2 majority on both other counts.

Bree, who was remanded in custody, will be sentenced by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, who deal with serious cases, on November 24 and he will receive a sentence of four years or more.  

Bree, 36, attacked Mr James Nuttall on three separate occasions, leaving him with numerous cuts and abrasions across his body.  

Bree initially attacked the victim at Snow Hill car park in the early hours of Sunday, March 13^th. He then followed Mr Nuttall to a bus stop on Green Street where he continued the assault. The victim ran away, but again Bree caught up with him, this time at the Panama Apartments, also on Green Street.   

On each occasion Bree assaulted Mr Nuttall with multiple blows, including kicks and he was also seen stamping on the victim.

Crown Advocate Matthew Maletroit told the jurors Bree had been seen by four members of the public attacking Mr Nuttall. The cause of their confrontation remains unknown, but Bree and Mr Nuttall did not know each other prior to the incident.    

Mr Maletroit said that together with his then girlfriend Amy Binnie, the defendant committed a “serious and sustained” assault on Mr Nuttall. Binnie has pleaded guilty to grave and criminal assault following the incident.

One witness saw Bree “kicking and stamping” on Mr Nuttall, while another saw the defendant punch the victim “five times to the face while he tried to get up.”

Mr Maletroit, 43, said Bree chased the victim to the Panama Apartments, Green Street, where Mr Nuttall was trying to use a key to get into his address.

The Crown Advocate said: “The victim was thrown or pushed down a flight of steps onto the pavement below. The victim was laying on the ground when he was attacked by a man and a woman. Kicks to the head were delivered at least three times and a witness described them as ‘enough to cause serious damage.’

“Another witness described the kicking ‘as though you would kick a football.’”

Two police officers arrived at the scene and one said he saw Bree assault the victim.

Mr Maletroit said: “He described it as like a football kick and he also saw the defendant stamp on his head before leaving the scene.”

Mr Nuttall, who lives on the UK mainland, had been drinking all day and had consumed between nine and 11 pints of lager before the assault.

Mr Maletroit said: “He was drunk but he has made it very clear what he did and did not remember. He does not know the defendant personally and has no reason for not telling the truth.

“The defendant was acting throughout in conjunction with his girlfriend Amy Binnie.”

The Crown Advocate also said there was bloodstains on Bree’s trainers and the DNA matched Mr Nuttall’s profile.

“The experts say those trainers made contact with a surface that was wet with blood,” said Mr Maletroit.   

With regard to the alleged theft of Mr Nuttall’s mobile phone, worth around £500, Mr Maletroit told the jurors it had been found on the pavement where Bree was arrested, at the Havre Des Pas Gardens.

Mr Maletroit said: “The only reasonable explanation was that the defendant took the phone and dropped it when he was arrested.”

As for the charge of resisting arrest, Mr Maletroit said Bree “tensed up” when an officer tried to handcuff him, spat, used foul and abusive language and was “struggling and frustrating the arresting procedure.”

He added: “There is ample evidence for you to be sure he committed the three offences.”

Defending Advocate Jeremy Heywood addressed the jurors, saying they “must be sure beyond all reasonable doubt that he is guilty. It is for the Crown to convince you so that you are absolutely sure.”

Mr Heywood said witnesses saw the attacker wearing “dark clothing,” whereas Bree was wearing a “white T-shirt and a light, grey hoodie top” when he was arrested.

Mr Heywood added: “By his own admission Mr Nuttall is a self-confessed bad drunk, but he got into an argument with a man who was not the defendant. I suggest to you that is possible.

“In the two police officers’ evidence, there is a significant difference in what they say they saw. The first officer saw the defendant kneeling on Mr Nuttall, but did not see at any time a kick, punch or a stamp.

“The next officer saw a kick and a stamp. That is not a minor inconsistency but a significant difference in account. There is considerable doubt as to what happened and these are two police officers. If they can’t be certain about what happened, neither can you.”   

Mr Heywood said the victim’s drunkenness meant his memory of the alleged phone theft was “sketchy and unreliable and you cannot place any weight on his evidence.”

Mr Heywood added that Bree did not try to resist arrest and was merely “tensing up” on the ground, “perhaps because he was uncomfortable.”

The Defending Advocate said it was only a matter of seconds before Bree was handcuffed and as such “you cannot be sure he was resisting arrest.”

Mr Heywood said: “He may have been thoroughly unpleasant, rude and offensive but that does not make him guilty. You may not like him, but that cannot make you convict him. You must be sure of his guilt before you convict. It is not enough to be almost sure.”   

The jury took two hours to deliver their verdict.

They heard Bree has 94 other convictions, including 18 drugs offences and is currently awaiting sentencing, having pleaded guilty, to one count of grave and criminal assault and two counts of threatening or abusive behaviour.