• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Policeman pushed onto a railway line. Suspended jail for the perpetrator

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
1,060
Location
London E14
What is wrong with the Legal system is that people who should be incarcerated and go on behavioural / anger management courses don't. And others who shouldn't be imprisoned, are, because it looks good in league tables / performance stats.
Indeed, the prisons service is in an appalling state (principally due to endless budget cuts I believe) and many (in some cases all) of those incarcerated do not get any help, education or training while inside. This means that the prison is failing in one of its primary duties, which is to enable those who have been imprisoned to become productive members of society upon release.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ASharpe

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2013
Messages
1,024
Location
West Yorkshire
I am not sure that police are trained to do this? Is that correct?

Police are trained in empty hand techniques: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/191371/response/473410/attach/3/Full 2011 UDT Manual.pdf

See page 2-37 to see what I am referring to.
Technique execution This technique can be executed with one or two hands. Palm heel technique This is an extremely strong, fast and effective technique, using whole body-weight. It is used to re-establish reactionary gap. Offi cer faces offender in defensive stance. As the offender lunges forward the offi cer drives both palms forward, striking with both palms to the offender’s upper torso/shoulders. The offender is pushed backwards by the impact and the offi cer can re-establish the safe reactionary gap.
 
Last edited:

ASharpe

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2013
Messages
1,024
Location
West Yorkshire
I think I ought to clarify that I am not anti-police or against the use of force by police. I have a very close family member who in the line of duty has been intentionally attacked and still suffers pain from those injuries.

But in this particular case I am not so sure the particular offence that this clearly violent woman pleaded guilty to was the right one.
 

farleigh

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2016
Messages
1,156
Police are trained in empty hand techniques: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/191371/response/473410/attach/3/Full 2011 UDT Manual.pdf

See page 2-37 to see what I am referring to.
Thanks for posting - it truly is a dreadfully produced document but I appreciate your effort in posting it. I still could not find the part that advised pushing somebody in the chest on a tube platform. Apologies if I missed that as I did not read it all in great detail, but would be grateful for any further guidance.
 

Steve Harris

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2016
Messages
1,196
Location
ECML
Indeed, the prisons service is in an appalling state (principally due to endless budget cuts I believe) and many (in some cases all) of those incarcerated do not get any help, education or training while inside. This means that the prison is failing in one of its primary duties, which is to enable those who have been imprisoned to become productive members of society upon release.

I totally agree. Prison is a good tool if used correctly and responsibly. I.e. educate people not to be a thieving so and so.

But if you dont educate that person with a skill so they can earn money legally and then give them a handout which wouldn't feed a mouse let alone a human being, is it a surprise they go back to thieving and it starts all over again.

Anyway, i digress as im going OT.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,909
Hmmmmmm. I doubt that very much.
Which bit are you doubting? That many hours of police, court and witnesses time are expended on preparing files etc. which are ultimately not required because a man who KNOWS he is guilty holds back admitting his guilt until crown court, OR the FACT, and I know it's a fact, that some guilty men hold back from admitting that guilt until they are sure the prosecution case is watertight AND that all witnesses are prepared to see it through?

Note my reference to men who KNOW they are guilty. I am not commenting about innocent men subject to miscarriages of justice.
 

ASharpe

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2013
Messages
1,024
Location
West Yorkshire
Thanks for posting - it truly is a dreadfully produced document but I appreciate your effort in posting it. I still could not find the part that advised pushing somebody in the chest on a tube platform. Apologies if I missed that as I did not read it all in great detail, but would be grateful for any further guidance.

Exactly, that technique is entirely inappropriate for the situation. If an on duty officer was in a dangerous environment I expect the level of force, if appropriate, would have been higher and would have safely dealt with any threat.

As far as I can tell, somebody has had a custodial sentence because they admitted to "Intent to endanger a person" after an entirely logical response to being pushed.

If this went to trial a jury and/or we might have learned more about exactly what happened and might have then come to the same or a different conclusion. I am just uncomfortable with the contradiction between the offence admitted and the facts in the summing up.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,922
Location
Fenny Stratford
We are unduly lenient when it comes to violent acts. I've done battle with one or two forum members on this subject in the past, so I risk

All sorts of excuses can be trotted out eg. "potential for greatness in sport", to ensure that even if you have umpteen convictions for violent acts, you don't get to jail.

A current member of staff at York station was almost murdered (no I am not exaggerating; we were told he wasn't expected to survive) back when he was 15 and the perpetrator only got a 4 month detention and training order for a sickening attack; it was obvious the thug was going to attack others, and our ludicrous legal system allowed him to do so, though he still didn't get an appropriate sentence. The huge quantity of ferocious attacks he had to do before he could even be named was just unbelievable. We protect the wrongdoers in society to a ludicrous extent.

Nothing will change; the violent thugs and bullies know they can inflict a lot of harm before they even get a slap on the wrist. There is no effective punishment that our legal system can impose that can deter them from their acts.

I know one or two forum members hate me saying the above, but you know what? I know I am right in standing up for what I believe in; they can't stop me speaking the truth.

I know that you hate being challenged so I will simply say I disagree with you. I wont waste my time or yours in trying to debate something like this with you. You don't want to know about or acknowledge an alternative view point, especially one based on experience of the system you freely criticse.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
32,922
Location
Fenny Stratford
As an aside - if you don't like what is happening volunteer to be a magistrate. Give up your time and give something back. Find out what it is like. This the link: https://www.gov.uk/become-magistrate

If you have got 5 or 7 years experience in a relevant field of law apply to become a judge. There is a slot for a circuit judge coming up. Give the Judicial Appointments Commission website a peak.

Well that didn't take long! Fine; we'll agree to disagree!

deal - anyway you know my views. I am much harsher than you ;)
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,476
Location
LBK
Nothing justify's pushing someone onto the track with possible fatal consequences.

Just saying.

There are quite a few situations where that could be justified.

There are even more where, while it could not be justified, could still be understood.
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,695
Nothing justify's pushing someone onto the track with possible fatal consequences.

Just saying.

Indeed, and she received a 6 month suspended custodial sentence. It's a rather twisted logic which understands supporting or not outright rejecting this as sentence as 'justifying'. A suspended sentence is still a sentence and carries many of the consequences of a served sentence. There's a debate about whether it is the right sentence but no one is justifying the act itself in this instance.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,476
Location
LBK
Firstly, what on earth does her being transgender have to do with this matter? Yes that was (presumably) the reason she had surgery where she did, but that is far from the only surgery on that area of the body.

Gender dysphoria is in itself a mental disorder. Given that one of the mitigating factors in this person’s defence is that they have mental health issues, it is no more or less relevant than including any other details of their mental health history.

Transgender people are also 200-300% more likely to have another serious mental health issue, particularly with suicidal ideation.

The person in the article seems particularly troubled and their case makes depressing reading.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,476
Location
LBK
The Sun reports that this person was initially held in a male prison before the judge granted bail.

The judge also said, in a manner of speaking, that he felt sorry for the person and this was why he could not impose a sentence of inprosonment:

Defence barrister Mustapha Hakme said Bregazzi is one surgery away from fully transitioning to a woman and said her mental health issues had been “exacerbated” by her being transgender."

"Judge Jeremy Dein, QC, released her on bail after telling the court he was “concerned” that she has been held in custody “in very difficult circumstances”.

Judge Dein said he did not “feel comfortable with imposing an immediate sentence of imprisonment” and deferred sentence until next February.

Bregazzi already has 40 convictions for assault, harassment and shoplifting designer frocks dating back to 2007, including attacks on staff and commuters at Highgate Station, East Finchley Station and Kings Cross Station

Basically they seem to have not only a record as long as your arm, but also a habit of attacking railway passengers and staff.

The fact they are transgender seems to form an important part of their defence, so it seems fair game to report it as a fact.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,476
Location
LBK
Was the woman's life in danger from the police officer?

That is the only justification I can think of for threatening too or taking someones life.

But the perpetrator did not take the policeman’s life nor did they threaten to.
 

SteveP29

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2011
Messages
1,181
Location
Edinburgh/ Chester le Street
it was obvious the thug was going to attack others, and our ludicrous legal system allowed him to do so, though he still didn't get an appropriate sentence. The huge quantity of ferocious attacks he had to do before he could even be named was just unbelievable. We protect the wrongdoers in society to a ludicrous extent.

We don't live in the society portrayed in Minority Report (both story and film), you can only be tried for the crime you have been arrested and charged with. The justice system cannot be held responsible or account for future crimes perpetrated by them. Only upon obtaining the verdict on the defendants guilt can and should other counts be brought into the equation
 

farleigh

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2016
Messages
1,156
We don't live in the society portrayed in Minority Report (both story and film), you can only be tried for the crime you have been arrested and charged with. The justice system cannot be held responsible or account for future crimes perpetrated by them. Only upon obtaining the verdict on the defendants guilt can and should other counts be brought into the equation
The justice system absolutely can be held accountable if it's sentencing is so weak as not to protect other members of society either by acting as a deterrent or keeping violent people off the streets. In this regard - and many others - the justice system is completely broken.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,476
Location
LBK
The justice system absolutely can be held accountable if it's sentencing is so weak as not to protect other members of society either by acting as a deterrent or keeping violent people off the streets. In this regard - and many others - the justice system is completely broken.

I agree. In the case in the OP the perpetrator has a record as long as your arm, and keeps on committing the same types of crimes.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,671
I've mentioned on this forum before about witnessing someone try to push a passenger off the platform, but I'll reprise it. It was an awfully long time ago, but I'll never forget it. It was on the northbound Victoria Line platform at Victoria Station, probably around 8.30 a.m. A tall person dressed as a woman, probably aged around 45, was stood not far from the platform edge, but with a young woman in front of her. I was stood a few feet away, further back and, iirc, the train could be heard in the tunnel coming towards us. Suddenly, the older woman shouted 'why are all the girls going to Oxford Circus?' and went to push the younger woman in the back, but luckily the man standing right next to her must have sensed something was going to happen because of the speed of his reaction in tackling her to the ground, and the younger woman too had time to scream and, more importantly, brace herself so that she didn't fall onto the track. I wish I could report the outcome of all this but, I have to admit, that in common with all the other non-involved passengers I just boarded that train and sped on my way. At the time I didn't consider the possibility of the woman not being a woman (this was 1973 or thereabouts) but now I'm not so sure. What I do remember thinking at the time was that I'd had my first encounter with 'the mad woman from Bromley' whom I'd heard about from fellow travellers on the line from Medway,etc, but of whom I'd not heard anything implying she was a danger to anyone other than herself. I do hope something happened to her (sectioning for mental health problems was much more prevalent then) and that she was never able to repeat her actions of that morning.
 

FQTV

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2012
Messages
1,067
A current member of staff at York station was almost murdered (no I am not exaggerating; we were told he wasn't expected to survive) back when he was 15 and the perpetrator only got a 4 month detention and training order for a sickening attack; it was obvious the thug was going to attack others, and our ludicrous legal system allowed him to do so, though he still didn't get an appropriate sentence. The huge quantity of ferocious attacks he had to do before he could even be named was just unbelievable. We protect the wrongdoers in society to a ludicrous extent.

OT, but I wonder if you're aware of apparently more recent events:

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/150...r_attack_on_brother___sister_in_Coney_Street/
A THUG has been jailed for two years and seven months for a vicious attack on a brother and sister in York city centre.

Callum Tooley, 21, and his girlfriend Mollie Kilby, 20, punched and kicked Christian Pratt as he lay on the ground, following an altercation between three groups. Kilby was given a suspended sentence.

Rob Galley, prosecuting at York Crown Court, said Mr Pratt and his sister, Stephanie, had been walking along Coney Street with two friends in the early hours of October 2 last year when they became embroiled in an argument with another group, including Tooley and Kilby, about a man who was lying in the doorway of the Boots store.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,375
Location
Yorkshire
OT, but I wonder if you're aware of apparently more recent events:

http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/150...r_attack_on_brother___sister_in_Coney_Street/
I think that is on topic as the point the OP was making is that we are far too lenient when it comes to sentencing people who are found guilty violent acts.

Anyway I was not aware of this, but sadly I did predict another attack. When he's out again, he will again attack someone else. Who will be the next victim? It could be someone I know again. There will be more victims because our legal system is setup to ensure that will be the case.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,609
Anyway I was not aware of this, but sadly I did predict another attack. When he's out again, he will again attack someone else. Who will be the next victim? It could be someone I know again. There will be more victims because our legal system is setup to ensure that will be the case.

Fully agreed (and back on topic). A horrible story to read. I tend to believe our justice systems over punishes for minor crimes and under punishes for major crimes.

I’m generally favour of a three tier prison system.

A lower tier prison for first/young offenders which promotes rehabilitation, support, help to improve etc. Preferably not detained at all, but allowed home on licence, given support etc.

A second tier of longer custodial sentences. Straight to the second tier for violent offences, also if you do two stints in the first tier, and offend again you wind up here. Equivalent to what we currently have for more serious offences. Rehabilitation etc. still offered.

The third tier - life without parole in a supermax (or U.K. equivalent)... Done on the cheap!

Awarded for multiple violence/sexual offences, or multiple lesser offences, mandatory for murder.

The third tier they get right in the states. The problem is they don’t give offenders much of a chance first.
 
Last edited:

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
1,060
Location
London E14
@Bromley boy that's almost completely arse-backwards (pardon the phraseology I I can't think of anything else that fits).

The purpose of a custodial sentence is not just punishment (and the punishment aspect is only deprivation of liberty) or to act as a deterrent, they're just small parts of it. The principal things are to separate people from the circumstances that led to their offending and to provide support, training and education so that upon release they can become a productive member of society. However, the combination of grossly underfunded and overcrowded prisons, grossly underfunded probation services, undermining of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (and similar) and the failing social security and benefits system mean that the system cannot do this job and far too often people are left with no option but to break the law. Every time that a prisoner re-offends after release it means that the prison system failed - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is not a sign of intelligence.

What prison you are sent to, and where and how you are housed within that prison, needs to be assessed on the combination of many factors, including:
  • The offence you committed (e.g. don't surround a young pickpocket with experienced burglars)
  • The risk you pose to the general pubic
  • The risk you pose to prison staff
  • The risk you pose to other inmates
  • How likely it is you will abscond or (try to) escape
  • The support you need (medical, psychological, emotional, educational, etc)
  • The training programs available (e.g. if someone wants to learn a trade, say plumbing, then it's no use sending them to a prison that has academic type training only)
All prisoners, need to be given things to do - they need access to books, to the television, to (supervised in most cases) internet access, training, education, etc. Locking someone up for extended periods with nothing but the walls to look at will do nothing except make their mental health worse, make their reintegration into society that much harder and therefore make them more likely to re-offend - chances are they have no idea how to do anything else and even if they do the lack of support outside means they have no way of supporting themselves while starting to learn how to put that in practice. Allowing prisoners a means to make money while inside is also good, as this will help them find their feet when released and teach them the benefits that come from earning a living, teach them about managing money, etc. It can also help fund the prisons - if a prisoner earns enough that they would pay income tax on the outside then just pay the exact same percentage to the prison.
Even someone who is going to be locked up for 20+ years needs all this as it means that they are less likely to attack prison guards and/or other inmates and will give them the benefits when they are released.

Very short, or part time (e.g. weekend only) prison sentences can work in a few cases but only where the person concerned already has the skills and aptitude to operate in society and only needs the consequences of their actions enforcing. In any other case they are are pointless waste of money.
 

Bromley boy

Established Member
Joined
18 Jun 2015
Messages
4,609
@Bromley boy that's almost completely arse-backwards (pardon the phraseology I I can't think of anything else that fits).

The purpose of a custodial sentence is not just punishment (and the punishment aspect is only deprivation of liberty) or to act as a deterrent, they're just small parts of it. The principal things are to separate people from the circumstances that led to their offending and to provide support, training and education so that upon release they can become a productive member of society. However, the combination of grossly underfunded and overcrowded prisons, grossly underfunded probation services, undermining of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (and similar) and the failing social security and benefits system mean that the system cannot do this job and far too often people are left with no option but to break the law. Every time that a prisoner re-offends after release it means that the prison system failed - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is not a sign of intelligence.

What prison you are sent to, and where and how you are housed within that prison, needs to be assessed on the combination of many factors, including:
  • The offence you committed (e.g. don't surround a young pickpocket with experienced burglars)
  • The risk you pose to the general pubic
  • The risk you pose to prison staff
  • The risk you pose to other inmates
  • How likely it is you will abscond or (try to) escape
  • The support you need (medical, psychological, emotional, educational, etc)
  • The training programs available (e.g. if someone wants to learn a trade, say plumbing, then it's no use sending them to a prison that has academic type training only)
All prisoners, need to be given things to do - they need access to books, to the television, to (supervised in most cases) internet access, training, education, etc. Locking someone up for extended periods with nothing but the walls to look at will do nothing except make their mental health worse, make their reintegration into society that much harder and therefore make them more likely to re-offend - chances are they have no idea how to do anything else and even if they do the lack of support outside means they have no way of supporting themselves while starting to learn how to put that in practice. Allowing prisoners a means to make money while inside is also good, as this will help them find their feet when released and teach them the benefits that come from earning a living, teach them about managing money, etc. It can also help fund the prisons - if a prisoner earns enough that they would pay income tax on the outside then just pay the exact same percentage to the prison.
Even someone who is going to be locked up for 20+ years needs all this as it means that they are less likely to attack prison guards and/or other inmates and will give them the benefits when they are released.

Very short, or part time (e.g. weekend only) prison sentences can work in a few cases but only where the person concerned already has the skills and aptitude to operate in society and only needs the consequences of their actions enforcing. In any other case they are are pointless waste of money.

I think you have misinterpreted my previous post. As I say I think the current system perhaps over punishes some minor offences and under punishes serious ones.

I agree with most of what you have said above. As I say I’d like a system that encourages rehabilitation for minor offences, ideally avoiding custody, but also “throws away the key” for offenders who prove to be bad apples and cannot be reformed.

In the case noted above, a repeat offender pushing someone onto a railway track and avoiding prison is an example of underpunishment, while it’s theoretically possible to be imprisoned for 5 years for the obscure offence of abstraction of electricity, for example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top