British Justice ... it sucks in this instance.

[oakiecokie]

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

There was one charge, and he pleaded not guilty?

Thats correct M`Lud.Guilty of hitting his victim but NOT guilty of using an attack with a Bottle/Glass.

 

[tidyman]

14 months for someone with no previous record, carrying out a presumably unpremeditated assault seems harsh .

I'm not sure following someone into the bogs with the sole intention of giving them a kicking and then giving them a kicking, can really be classed as unpremeditated.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

A cut to the left cheek and a lump on the right eyebrow.

and what was the charge?

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

Been reading up on this.

There is no offence of Assault With A Weapon in this country. There is Common Assault, which I assume was the original charge, which could have been dealt with by magistrates and would have involved a custodial sentence of up to 6 months. Then there is Assault Occasioning Actual Bodliy Harm, for which injuries have to be classed as more serious rather than 'transient and trifling'. This can also be dealt with on the same basis. Then there's Assault Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm. A headbutt is indeed classed as an aggravating factor in all of these cases.

From what I can see, A 'Newton Hearing' is used when the defendant doesn't dispute that an offence took place but does dispute some material facts that may have an outcome on the sentencing. But the defendant gets little credit for his guilty plea and, when he does, often receives less than he's get in a jury trial. So there's a lot of risk and no reward.

Here's an interesting article, which challenges the usefulness of a Newton Hearing:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Newton-Hearings-%E2%80%93-Procedure-Stacked-Against-Defence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/ ... st-Defence</a>.

You also seem to be suggesting that he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge (Common Assault) but that was then upgraded to a more serious one (ABH) due to the alleged use of a bottle to which his guilty plea still applied. I'm no lawyer but I doubt that happens. He must have been asked to plead to the more serious charge?

I don't know how it works here but in the US, he would presumably do a plea bargain whereby he pleads guilty to the lesser charge in exchange for a non-custodial sentence. Could his lawyer not have said to the police or CPS "My client will plead guilty to a charge of Common Assault but not guilty to a charge of ABH?" In that case they would need very strong justification to go for the more serious charge when they knew they'd get a result on the less serious charge plus save court time and costs.

It really doesn't sound like he was well advised here.

 

[oakiecokie]

and what was the charge?

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

It would be the prosecution claiming a bottle had been used based on the evidence presented, the judge has then to decide whether the evidence is relevant enough to impose the judgement given. Sorry oakie, but I doubt a judge would find someone guilty on the basis that there was a bit of glass on the bog floor, surely the blokes injuries would have to back up such an attack?

Thats something which again was very weak evidence from the Prosecutors with no marks on the back of his head to suggest he had been hit with a Bottle/Glass.The injuries sustained were a cut on the left cheek and a bump above his right eye.
When Anthonys brief asked why the hospital and police found no marks to suggest otherwise,he claimed bruising came out some days later.
Our Pub Owner swept the broken glass up on entering the toilets as he didn`t want customers injuring themselves.At no time was the glass ever asked for as evidence,but the Owner did confirm to the Police that he had cleaned broken glass up.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

I should imagine his wife is feeling rather down and vulnerable at the moment, and needs a shoulder to cry on.
Only an incredibly shallow, superficial and cynical person would exploit this situation for sexual gain, and I know you're not like that, oakie.
I am though, so if you pm me a picture and a contact number, I'll be round to console her later after the evening racing.

 

[oakiecokie]

and what was the charge?

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

Been reading up on this.

There is no offence of Assault With A Weapon in this country. There is Common Assault, which I assume was the original charge, which could have been dealt with by magistrates and would have involved a custodial sentence of up to 6 months. Then there is Assault Occasioning Actual Bodliy Harm, for which injuries have to be classed as more serious rather than 'transient and trifling'. This can also be dealt with on the same basis. Then there's Assault Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm. A headbutt is indeed classed as an aggravating factor in all of these cases.

From what I can see, A 'Newton Hearing' is used when the defendant doesn't dispute that an offence took place but does dispute some material facts that may have an outcome on the sentencing. But the defendant gets little credit for his guilty plea and, when he does, often receives less than he's get in a jury trial. So there's a lot of risk and no reward.

Here's an interesting article, which challenges the usefulness of a Newton Hearing:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Newton-Hearings-%E2%80%93-Procedure-Stacked-Against-Defence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/ ... st-Defence</a>.

You also seem to be suggesting that he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge (Common Assault) but that was then upgraded to a more serious one (ABH) due to the alleged use of a bottle to which his guilty plea still applied. I'm no lawyer but I doubt that happens. He must have been asked to plead to the more serious charge?

I don't know how it works here but in the US, he would presumably do a plea bargain whereby he pleads guilty to the lesser charge in exchange for a non-custodial sentence. Could his lawyer not have said to the police or CPS "My client will plead guilty to a charge of Common Assault but not guilty to a charge of ABH?" In that case they would need very strong justification to go for the more serious charge when they knew they'd get a result on the less serious charge plus save court time and costs.

It really doesn't sound like he was well advised here.

That appears to be the case Col and I havn`t heard how well or bad his brief did at the hearing.

 

[oakiecokie]

I should imagine his wife is feeling rather down and vulnerable at the moment, and needs a shoulder to cry on.
Only an incredibly shallow, superficial and cynical person would exploit this situation for sexual gain, and I know you're not like that, oakie.
I am though, so if you pm me a picture and a contact number, I'll be round to console her later after the evening racing.

I will pass on your goodwill "services" to his wife and sincerely hope that your intentions are honourable my good man.It is nice to hear that some people really do care.Thanks you NF.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

There was one charge, and he pleaded not guilty?

Thats correct M`Lud.Guilty of hitting his victim but NOT guilty of using an attack with a Bottle/Glass.

He either pleaded guilty or not guilty to the charge. It must have been the former but he then presumably disputed material facts of the case and entered a Basis of Plea saying so. It was that which required the hearing.

 

[Skashion]

The original charge was assault (ie no weapon).Anthony told the police and even in his satement that he used his head and fists.A few weeks later his brief confirmed that the charge was changed to assault with a weapon (ie a glass).However Anthony was advised that a head was classified as a weapon,something he accepted,although like many people would never have imagined that.
But still the Judge claimed it was an assault with a bottle/glass,hence him denying that charge.Time and time again it was discussed ref a bottle used in the assault.

There was one charge, and he pleaded not guilty?

Thats correct M`Lud.Guilty of hitting his victim but NOT guilty of using an attack with a Bottle/Glass.

You can't do that if there's one charge.

 

[oakiecokie]

There was one charge, and he pleaded not guilty?

Thats correct M`Lud.Guilty of hitting his victim but NOT guilty of using an attack with a Bottle/Glass.

You can't do that if there's one charge.

No going to argue with you Skash,but just have a read of BP`s post above.In this instance this is exactly what happened.

 

[malg]

Again, what was it the bloke done over the years, as a neighbour, that pissed this bloke off so much that he fucked him over in a pub toilet? Maybe the judge thought those reasons were flimsy and therefore handed down a sentence that he deemed suitable to someone with no real excuse for the assault.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Thats correct M`Lud.Guilty of hitting his victim but NOT guilty of using an attack with a Bottle/Glass.

You can't do that if there's one charge.

No going to argue with you Skash,but just have a read of BP`s post above.In this instance this is exactly what happened.

But I still don't understand what happened exactly regarding the charge. You made it sound like he pleaded guilty to common assault but then the charge was upgraded to ABH without him being given a chance to plead again. That couldn't have happened.

 

[garymj]

What I can't understand is you mate putting up with years of abuse, why not go around his place , or phone him, and have a straightener, get it sorted there and then, end of story.

 

[oakiecokie]

You can't do that if there's one charge.

No going to argue with you Skash,but just have a read of BP`s post above.In this instance this is exactly what happened.

But I still don't understand what happened exactly regarding the charge. You made it sound like he pleaded guilty to common assault but then the charge was upgraded to ABH without him being given a chance to plead again. That couldn't have happened.

Sorry Col but I thought I`d explained on more than one occasion.The original charge by the Police was one of "common assault" which was for hitting with fists and head and something which Anthony has always admitted to.Although the Police at THAT time found NO evidence to suggest a Bottle/Glass had been used,based on their findings and that off a medical assessment at a Hospital.
Weeks later after both parties had sought legal help Anthony was then called to an urgent meeting with his Solicitor who then advised him that the charges had been changed to a more violent one,over an accusation of a Bottle/Glass being used.
Ant told them to fuck off and said there was NO way he would ever admit to that,as he was NOT guilty of an attack with anything other than his fists and head.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

If the abuse is illegal, then use 911. If it is annoying, welcome to the world of living with neighbors. If it is annoying to the point of needing to SAY something, SAY it! If it is annoying, but not illegal, but it spoils the enjoyment of living in your home, call the council and file a complaint.

There is NEVER a good reason to follow someone down the hallway to the toilet and do him with head butt and fists. Walk away. THAT is what trained killers are trained to do. I doubt your mate would have followed him to the loo if he thought he might get a good hiding from the annoying neighbor.

As YOU SAID, the red mist descended on your mate. After that, all bets are off.....and, as I abhor personal violence, ABH in the bog followed by a sentence sounds about right. Sorry your mate sounds like he got stitched up for glassing the guy.....BUT if he had had a verbal altercation in front of others, perhaps witnesses might have testified to there being significant provocation, no glass or bottle used, and NO ACTION TAKEN, other than getting thrown out of the pub.

I wonder how you would have felt if your mate had gone to the loo and been jumped by some nutter neighbor with the red mist, ending up getting butted and twatted? No doubt the NEIGHBOR would have been a ****!

There is a line....taking a V in the face is on one side, butting a guy and twitting him after following him to the loo is on the other....regardless of the length of the sentence. Once you put yourself at the mercy of the court, YOU LOSE YOUR ABILITY TO CONTROL YOUR OWN FUTURE.....and your mate knew that going in.

 

[oakiecokie]

What I can't understand is you mate putting up with years of abuse, why not go around his place , or phone him, and have a straightener, get it sorted there and then, end of story.

They live literally yards away and this has been simmering for years.Anthony has kept a lid on a lot of things and it all came to a head when he snapped as the neighbour became the Billy Big Bollocks in the pub,giving him v-signs and making sure people heard what he was saying about Ant.
Arguments over litter,noise,kids,dust-bins,dogs,you name it.But when he started giving grief to his Missus and swearing at her,then the twat overstepped the mark.Ant went around but the fucker wouldn`t answer or open the door.
That was it.Or so they thought,until their paths next crossed in the pub and it kicked off,with Ant venting his fury at the guy who he told to "shut the fuck up".

 

[malg]

What I can't understand is you mate putting up with years of abuse, why not go around his place , or phone him, and have a straightener, get it sorted there and then, end of story.

They live literally yards away and this has been simmering for years.Anthony has kept a lid on a lot of things and it all came to a head when he snapped as the neighbour became the Billy Big Bollocks in the pub,giving him v-signs and making sure people heard what he was saying about Ant.
Arguments over litter,noise,kids,dust-bins,dogs,you name it.But when he started giving grief to his Missus and swearing at her,then the twat overstepped the mark.Ant went around but the fucker wouldn`t answer or open the door.
That was it.Or so they thought,until their paths next crossed in the pub and it kicked off,with Ant venting his fury at the guy who he told to "shut the fuck up".

OK, if he was swearing at his missus then he deserved a dig. Your mate is just a dick for doing it in a place where there were witnesses.

 

[chris85mcfc]

What I can't understand is you mate putting up with years of abuse, why not go around his place , or phone him, and have a straightener, get it sorted there and then, end of story.

They live literally yards away and this has been simmering for years.Anthony has kept a lid on a lot of things and it all came to a head when he snapped as the neighbour became the Billy Big Bollocks in the pub,giving him v-signs and making sure people heard what he was saying about Ant.
Arguments over litter,noise,kids,dust-bins,dogs,you name it.But when he started giving grief to his Missus and swearing at her,then the twat overstepped the mark.Ant went around but the fucker wouldn`t answer or open the door.
That was it.Or so they thought,until their paths next crossed in the pub and it kicked off,with Ant venting his fury at the guy who he told to "shut the fuck up".

Sounds like handbags really, but there was no need to go in the toilet and punch, headbutt and bottle him :)

 

[pieface]

I feel sorry for Anthony,if this was his first conviction, going to jail over a fight in a pub.
On the face of it,the other chap seems a vindictive type who seemed to want to get the accused into more trouble than he was already in.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

What I can't understand is you mate putting up with years of abuse, why not go around his place , or phone him, and have a straightener, get it sorted there and then, end of story.

They live literally yards away and this has been simmering for years.Anthony has kept a lid on a lot of things and it all came to a head when he snapped as the neighbour became the Billy Big Bollocks in the pub,giving him v-signs and making sure people heard what he was saying about Ant.
Arguments over litter,noise,kids,dust-bins,dogs,you name it.But when he started giving grief to his Missus and swearing at her,then the twat overstepped the mark.Ant went around but the fucker wouldn`t answer or open the door.
That was it.Or so they thought,until their paths next crossed in the pub and it kicked off,with Ant venting his fury at the guy who he told to "shut the fuck up".

Sounds like he should have moved a LONG time ago, or called the council or a lawyer. Personally, I'm not sure I would want to live next to a scrote family like this one sounds.