Agenda item

Proposal:     Personal Licence Application

Applicant:    Raffaele Vigliotti

NOTICE OF DECISION

The Licensing Sub-Committee of West Berkshire Council met on 20^th November 2012 and resolved to reject Application Number 12/01615/LIA for a Personal Licence submitted by Raffaele Vigliotti.

In coming to their decision, the Sub-Committee had regard to the four licensing objectives, which are:

1.                 the prevention of crime and disorder;

2.                 public safety;

3.                 the prevention of public nuisance; and

4.                 the protection of children from harm.

They also considered the Department of Culture, Media and Sport Guidance on the Licensing Act 2003 and West Berkshire Council’s licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee heard representations made by:

1.                  The Applicant:           Mr Raffaele Vigliotti

2.                  The Objectors:           Mike King on behalf of Thames Valley Police

Having taken those representations into account, the Licensing Sub-Committee RESOLVED to refuse Application Number 12/01615/LIA for a Personal Licence submitted by Mr Vigliotti, for the following reasons:

1.                  Mr Vigliotti was convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm at Reading Crown Court on the 25 August 2010.  This is a relevant offence for the purposes of section 120 (2)(d) Licensing Act 2003 (as prescribed under section 113 and paragraph 19 of Schedule 4 of the Licensing Act 2003, being a violent offence which leads/is intended to lead/is likely to lead to physical injury to a person).

2.                  Following conviction, Mr Vigliotti was sentenced to a conditional discharge and was ordered to pay compensation.  The rehabilitation period under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 where a compensation order is imposed is five years from the date of conviction (see section 5 (2), Table A). Therefore the conviction is not spent.

3.                  The Sub-Committee noted that the conviction related to a very serious assault and that the matter had been referred to the Crown Court because it was so serious.  The Sub-Committee also noted that there was more than half of the rehabilitation period remaining in respect of the offence, before it would become spent for the purposes of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.  

4.                  The Sub-Committee noted that Police objected to the grant of the licence and were mindful of paragraph 9.12 of the Statutory Guidance, which stated that the Police should be the Licensing Authority’s main source of advice on matters relating to the promotion of the crime and disorder licensing objective.

5.                  The Sub-Committee also had regard to the guidance in Chapter 4 of the Statutory Guidance, which explained the significant responsibility placed on personal licence holders in connection with the sale and supply of alcohol, due to the impact of this on the wider community and on crime and anti-social behaviour.

6.                  The Sub-Committee had regard to the representations of Mr Vigliotti that prior to the incident, he was of good character with no convictions in the past 53 years, and it was noted that Mr Vigliotti stated that he did not suggest that his actions were right.  However, it was considered that Mr Vigliotti’s representations did not overcome the Police objection.

7.                  For all the reasons given above, the Sub-Committee determined to reject the application as it was considered that it was necessary to do so for the promotion of the crime prevention objective.

The Sub-Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 2(1)) concerning the application for a Personal Licence number 12/01615/LIA for Mr Raffaele Vigliotti.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Emilia Matheou (Licensing Officer, West Berkshire Council), Mr Raffaele Vigliotti (Applicant) and Mr Mike King (representative - Thames Valley Police) addressed the Sub-Committee on this application.

Ms Matheou, in addressing the Sub-Committee, raised the following points:

Mr Raffaele Vigliotti of The Hedges, Bath Road, Padworth, Reading, Berkshire RG7 8QS submitted an application on 08 October 2012 to West Berkshire Council Licensing for a Personal Licence to be granted under section 117 of the Licensing Act.

When submitting the application Mr Vigliotti provided a basic disclosure of convictions dated 03 October 2012 and completed a self declaration disclosing an unspent conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

This matter was heard on 25 August 2010 at Reading Crown Court and was disposed of by way of conditional discharge, costs and compensation.

The offence appeared to be a ‘relevant’ offence as specified under Section 113(1) of LA03 and is listed in Schedule 4 of the Act.  Under section 120(4) of the Act; the Licensing Authority is required to give notice to the Chief Officer of Police for the area.  Notice was given on 11 October 2012.  Representations were made on 19 October 2012 by Mike King Thames Valley Police Licensing Officer.  Nature of representations:  Crime and Disorder objective.  There was no evidence that mediation had taken place.

Mr Raffaele Vigliotti, in addressing the Sub-Committee, raised the following points:

Mr Vigliotti advised that he did not say that what he did was the right thing to do.  He went on to say that all the evidence prior to the event was about how he had helped the people over a long period of time.  His record over the past 53 years was crystal clear with no previous convictions; he had never before struck anyone and therefore asked the Licensing Sub-Committee to take this into account and for them to give careful consideration to those facts.  He said that he was capable of holding a personal licence and would act responsibly.

Councillor Jeff Beck asked if there were any questions for Mr Vigliotti from the Licensing Sub-Committee.  No questions were asked.

Mr Mike King, in addressing the Sub-Committee, raised the following points:

The Police used the National Computer (PNC) to conduct searches on every individual that applied for a Personal Licence.  Such a search was conducted on Mr Vigliotti and it came positive on a PNC record.  The crime report was recovered and a copy of the report was enclosed with the papers for the hearing.

As the crime report advised, Mr Vigliotti and others were involved in a particularly serious assault in which the aggrieved was repeatedly kicked and punched resulting in him receiving a broken arm, lots of bruising, one eye completely closed and the other eye partially closed upon attendance at Hospital.  Initially during conversation the aggrieved had concerns with engaging with the Police because of repercussions. 

Mr Vigliotti was identified by the DNA and was sent to Reading Crown Court by the CPS where he was found guilty of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and was ordered to pay £250 costs and was further ordered to pay £500 in compensation.

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act had been introduced by Parliament as a means of a measurement as to when a person found guilty of an offence was considered rehabilitated.  The Act was quite specific on the periods for a large range of offences and has placed a rehabilitation period, for a person who had been ordered to pay compensation and aged eighteen or over at the time of conviction, of five years.

Mr Vigliotti was found guilty on 25 August 2010 which meant that his rehabilitation period would not be complete until 25 August 2015.  That was nearly three years from the date of his application which was made on 08 October 2012.

The Police considered that given the offence, the period left remaining of the five year period prescribed in legislation, was much too long.  In accordance with Part 9.12 of the Secretary of State’s amended section 182 guidance, the written evidence and oral evidence heard, Thames Valley Police requested that the application be rejected.

Councillor Jeff Beck asked if there were any questions for Mr Mike King.

Councillor Billy Drummond asked Mr King if Mr Vigliotti had paid the costs promptly and on time.  Mr King responded to say that he had no record.  Councillor Drummond then asked Mr Vigliotti the same question and Mr Vigliotti advised that he had.  Councillor Drummond then asked for the time period for the payments.  Mr Vigliotti said that £250 had been paid immediately and the balance had been paid over 3 months.

Councillor Geoff Mayes asked Mr King if he could explain the interview dates and times that he had in front of him as he was finding the information confusing.  Mr King explained that there were two crime reports and one reflected the other.  Councillor Mayes said that he found them difficult to follow.  Mr King said that the officers reported the events step by step as they were happening, initially the altercation was between two people, but then three further people turned up and joined in the assault.

There being no further questions Councillor Beck asked Mr Vigliotti if he wished to make any closing comments.

Mr Vigliotti advised that he had been accused of repeatedly kicking and punching the person, that was a lie which had been proved when he had appeared in court.  He went on to say that the police had written the statements for the people, that the man had punched his wife and that was why the judge took a different view of the events.  The evidence was incorrect and the witnesses had lied on the stand which was why the judge had viewed the offence differently.

The Sub-Committee retired at 11.47am to make its decision.