gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
To sentence him to more than the statutory maximum? How is that possible?Road rage is an aggravating feature. And magistrates and district judges will very much take that into account.
To sentence him to more than the statutory maximum? How is that possible?Road rage is an aggravating feature. And magistrates and district judges will very much take that into account.
The fact that an incident takes place on the road is NOT an aggravating factor
No it isn’t.
To sentence him to more than the statutory maximum? How is that possible?
Can we have a poll?Absolute bollocks if you think his offence is worse than those twats.
You’re wrong. A head and a shod foot are, saliva isn’t. If saliva carries an infection it would be charged as s47/20/18 depending on the impact on the victim and the intent. So rather than be seen as a weapon per se, it impacts on the offence committed and therefore the sentence more directly.it is. As is a head or a shod foot.
How is it greater harm? It would appear there was no injury or fear of injury.
Where have I said it’s acceptable? He’s quoted the sentencing guidelines and I’ve asked him to explain why it is ‘greater harm’ in the context of those guidelines.I have never even considered spitting on a person. Why should he think it is acceptable regardless?
Public spitting was outlawed for good reason because of the transmission of disease like TB. No excuse for Carragher. He is a public figure so should ignore and go about his business. Shamefull. Paid handsomely for his views. Deserves all he gets if he falls short of common decency.
Spitting is considered assault with a weapon.
No it isn’t.
Not necessarily correct. It can be common assault if the victim apprehends the immediate infliction of unlawful force. That’s not inconceivable based on that footage.It's battery for starters, not assault.