• 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!

Boden Hughes charged with ferry arson & cable theft

Status
Not open for further replies.

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,291
Location
Yorkshire
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25546091

A man has been charged with arson after a fire broke out on a North Sea ferry.

Six people were airlifted to hospital suffering from smoke inhalation on the MS King Seaways, 30 miles from the Yorkshire coast, on Saturday night.

The DFDS Seaways ferry, which was bound for the Netherlands, had 946 passengers and 127 crew on board.

Northumbria Police said Boden George Hughes, 26, from Sunderland, had been charged with arson reckless to endangering life and affray....
This appears to be the same Boden Hughes who stands accused of cable theft, and has previously been convicted of shoplifting (mugshot available)

I guess he'll be given a little telling off, given a "supervision order", banned from setting fire to ferries for 5 years, banned from stealing cables from the railway for 5 years, and get free legal aid at huge taxpayer expense, and his solicitor will come out with comments like "previously of good character" and "is a changed man" and other such nonsense, to keep the sentence as low as possible.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

CC 72100

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2012
Messages
3,850
Don't think it's the first time that this route has had issues of this nature, seems to attract the clientele for it...

Put it like this, as soon as I was told of a fire on a ferry that it was rumored to have started deliberately, I gussed the route right ;)
 
Last edited:

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,329
Are there any specific laws on the statute book that govern arson on a sea-going vessel ?

Even if there are, do you think they will be used to their full effect?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I wonder if the person that allowed him out on bale so he could commit this crime will be 'chatted to'?
 

mrunlimited

New Member
Joined
30 Dec 2013
Messages
1
In March last year, I went on the same ferry and encountered a very bad experience. Whilst partying on the club deck, my room ticket was stolen from me or accidentally dropped on to the floor, the thief went into my cabin and stole my iPhone, £200 (both in sterling and euros) and my passport. I wasn't able to pass customs at Ijmuiden and was asked to return back to the ferry and waited for 5 hours whilst everybody else visited Amsterdam. Luckily, my best friend stayed with me throughout. Nothing of his was stolen. My suitcase was under my bed and zipped whilst his was padlocked and on top of his bed (our beds were bunk beds) with his passport behind the door, in his jacket.
I take medication, luckily the thief didn't steal my medication otherwise I would have been ill throughout the journey back to North Shields. It was the most stressful and dreadful trip I had ever had, I just wanted to wake myself up from that nightmarish trip.

I do not know if this has been mentioned but we all know how easy it is to Google someone and I came upon an article in 2009 about the same Boden Hughes from Sunderland stealing £1 million worth of Nissan car parts. Obviously this guy is a notorious scumbag who never learns his lession and probably enjoys being handcuffed by a male police enforcer.
 
Last edited:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,291
Location
Yorkshire
In March last year, I went on the same ferry and encountered a very bad experience......
Welcome to the forum. I am very sorry to hear of your bad experience :(
Let the punishment fit the crime.
That will never happen in cases like these.
I wonder if the person that allowed him out on bale so he could commit this crime will be 'chatted to'?
Unlikely, as they would have been following guidelines. It's the system which is broken (and utterly biased towards chavs/yobs).
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,329
There's probably a law along the lines of "Endangering life at sea"...

I am thinking more of "willfully polluting the sea"! ;)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Unlikely, as they would have been following guidelines. It's the system which is broken (and utterly biased towards chavs/yobs).

Very true unfortunately!
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,528
Location
Liskeard
I believe he can be tried under maritime laws. He will serve time for endangering a vessel as is treated very seriously, especially if the MCA get involved in the prosecution. They have been involved in the investigation so looking possible.

Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 states Endangering a ship's safety is punishable by life imprisonment. I'm pretty certain setting fire to a ship at sea may show intent of the offence.

(1)

Subject to subsection (5) below, a person commits an offence if he unlawfully and intentionally—
.


(a)

destroys a ship or a fixed platform,
.


(b)

damages a ship, its cargo or a fixed platform so as to endanger, or to be likely to endanger, the safe navigation of the ship, or as the case may be, the safety of the platform, or
.


(c)

commits on board a ship or on a fixed platform an act of violence which is likely to endanger the safe navigation of the ship, or as the case may be, the safety of the platform.
.


(2)

Subject to subsection (5) below, a person commits an offence if he unlawfully and intentionally places, or causes to be placed, on a ship or fixed platform any device or substance which—
.


(a)

in the case of a ship, is likely to destroy the ship or is likely so to damage it or its cargo as to endanger its safe navigation, or
.


(b)

in the case of a fixed platform, is likely to destroy the fixed platform or so to damage it as to endanger its safety.
.


(3)

Nothing in subsection (2) above is to be construed as limiting the circumstances in which the commission of any act—
.


(a)

may constitute an offence under subsection (1) above, or
.


(b)

may constitute attempting or conspiring to commit, or aiding, abetting, counselling, procuring or inciting, or being art and part in, the commission of such an offence.
.


(4)

Except as provided by subsection (5) below, subsections (1) and (2) above apply whether any such act as is mentioned in those subsections is committed in the United Kingdom or elsewhere and whatever the nationality of the person committing the act.
.


(5)

Subsections (1) and (2) above do not apply in relation to any act committed in relation to a warship or any other ship used as a naval auxiliary or in customs or police service unless—
.


(a)

the person committing the act is a United Kingdom national, or
.


(b)

his act is committed in the United Kingdom, or
.


(c)

the ship is used in the naval or customs service of the United Kingdom or in the service of any police force in the United Kingdom.
.


(6)

A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for life.
.


(7)

In this section—
.

act of violence means—



(a)

any act done in the United Kingdom which constitutes the offence of murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, culpable homicide or assault or an offence under section 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28 or 29 of the Offences against the M1Person Act 1861 or under section 2 of the M2Explosive Substances Act 1883, and
.


(b)

any act done outside the United Kingdom which, if done in the United Kingdom, would constitute such an offence as is mentioned in paragraph (a) above, and
.

unlawfully—



(a)

in relation to the commission of an act in the United Kingdom, means so as (apart from this Act) to constitute an offence under the law of the part of the United Kingdom in which the act is committed, and
.


(b)

in relation to the commission of an act outside the United Kingdom, means so that the commission of the act would (apart from this Act) have been an offence under the law of England and Wales if it had been committed in England and Wales or of Scotland if it had been committed in Scotland.
 

swj99

Member
Joined
7 Nov 2011
Messages
770
.........accused.........
Yes, accused. There hasn't been a trial yet. And whatever anyone might think of the accused, or the situation, due process of law and the presumption of innocence is what sets this the UK apart from 3rd world countries.
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,528
Location
Liskeard
If so, why then has he been remanded in custody until his court appearance in two weeks time ?

I suspect it may relate to the conditional bail he is already on pending a court appearance for £2m of cable theft from Network Rail.
He is due in court for that offence in March.

The reported £800,000 damage he caused is small scale compared to other things coming up on Google.
£1m worth of catalytic converters stolen from Nissan - he got a curfew for that in 2009
£2m of Cable theft from Network rail between March 2011 and March 2013. He is due to stand trial for that offence in March 2014, and is currently on a conditional bail based on media reports.

The offences named on BBC he has been charged with if guilty carry life imprisonment as the sentence.
 

Shimbleshanks

Established Member
Joined
2 Jan 2012
Messages
1,283
Location
Purley
If he was already awaiting trial for serious crimes, how come he was allowed to travel abroad? Shouldn't he have had his passport taken off him?
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,589
Location
Birmingham
Yes, accused. There hasn't been a trial yet. And whatever anyone might think of the accused, or the situation, due process of law and the presumption of innocence is what sets this the UK apart from 3rd world countries.

This is why people should neither be named nor have their picture published until they've been convicted of crime. Trial by media is an absolute joke - they don't care about ruining lives or factual accuracy but making money.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
his solicitor will come out with comments like "previously of good character" and "is a changed man" and other such nonsense, to keep the sentence as low as possible.

You mean do his job like a professional? :roll:
 

Shimbleshanks

Established Member
Joined
2 Jan 2012
Messages
1,283
Location
Purley
Depends on the conditions of the bail.

I would have thought that someone who had taken part in a multi-million pound theft might have the cash to make a dash for freedom abroad. Surprised it wasn't set as a condition of his bail...
 

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
This is why people should neither be named nor have their picture published until they've been convicted of crime. Trial by media is an absolute joke - they don't care about ruining lives or factual accuracy but making money.

That is why we have the Contempt of Court Act. What journalists can - and can not - report is entirely in the hands of the appropriate judiciary. Reporting restrictions can remain in place should the judge deem it necessary.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,495
Location
Isle of Man
If so, why then has he been remanded in custody until his court appearance in two weeks time ?

Being remanded in custody is not a mark of guilt. You will be remanded in custody if the bench think you will commit another offence. But you will also be remanded in custody if the bench think other people will try and hurt you.

Why staying in the UK was not a condition of bail, who knows. But he obviously can't have been making too much of a bid for freedom, or else he'd have kept his head down.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,408
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Being remanded in custody is not a mark of guilt. You will be remanded in custody if the bench think you will commit another offence.

But is that "legal thinking" not just another case of "legal pre-judgement", this time by the legal authorities themselves.

You cannot have the argument without noting that particular matter, which you yourself have been at pains to cite as an example.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top