A man who has spent four months in prison for causing a serious and permanent injury to a robber has been given a suspended sentence.

Arthur Douglas, 57, from Devonshire, was convicted by a Supreme Court jury of causing grievous bodily harm to Cannoth Roberts on Union Street last November.

Mr Roberts reportedly suffered severe brain trauma in the incident, including a subdural haemorrhage and a pulmonary embolism.

His injuries caused him to suffer memory loss and he remains in a residential care facility.

Mr Roberts was unable to testify about the incident but Douglas told the court that he had punched and kicked him in self-defence after he robbed him.

During a sentencing hearing on Friday, prosecutor Alan Richards noted the life-altering extent of the injuries suffered and Douglas’s attitude towards the offence, saying that while he had expressed remorse for the extent of the injuries, he had not expressed remorse for his actions.

He said that the court must sentence Douglas on the basis that the incident was a result of Mr Roberts robbing him, but said that he “grossly overreacted”, and called for a sentence of two-to-three years behind bars.

However, defence lawyer Bruce Swan said that a suspended sentence would be appropriate given the circumstances, describing Douglas as a hard-working man fighting to recover his property.

“Douglas had been drinking with friends and was seeking to get some food,” he said.

“He was then robbed by Mr Roberts, but followed him into an alley where the incident between the two took place.”

Douglas said: “I feel remorseful for these actions. It’s turned my life into a spiral downward. If I could do anything to help this young man find work or become a productive citizen, I would do so.”

Puisne Judge Carlise Greaves said that the incident had permanently altered the lives of both men.

“On one hand we have a virtual complainant, now seriously injured who, before then, for whatever reasons not before the court, pursued a life of crime and civil disobedience, engaging in the flagrant robbery of persons, numerous other thefts and the use of violence against persons,” he said.

“All of which culminated in what appears to be this final robbery.

“On the other hand, the defendant appeared to be a hard-working man who has had some problems with the law in the past but has since worked hard for his money and property and appeared to be sentimentally attached to his jewellery.”

Mr Justice Greaves said it could be inferred by the verdict that the jury had found that Douglas did not intend to cause grievous bodily harm, but in all the circumstances he had gone too far.

“In the circumstances, had this case been in the ordinary case of grievous bodily harm, given the severity of it, the sentence I might have attached would be one of between 15 months and three years in prison,” he said. “On the other hand, this was a case I find of substantial provocation given by the virtual complainant to the defendant in the circumstances. The provocation is a factor which I think I’m entitled to take into account when it comes to the issue of sentence.

“I hold the view that it was of such a substantial nature that it should attract a discount in excess of 50 per cent.”

Mr Justice Greaves sentenced Douglas to 15 months behind bars, but ordered that the four months he had already served be taken into account and the remainder of the sentence suspended for 18 months.

“This case demonstrates how easy it is for one’s course of life to be changed,” he said.

“One act in a split second has changed the lives of two persons and two families for a long time.

“I wish both sides an improvement in their circumstances.”

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases.