Person thrown against freight train

[YorkshireBear]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-16755863

6 month suspended sentance? seriously?

It should of been attempted murder surely! 8/10 times he would of got dragged down onto the track?

I think the judge who decided this should get sent to prison....

 

[jon0844]

There was also this;

He was also ordered to pay £500 compensation to his victim, who has not been identified, carry out 200 hours of unpaid work, pay prosecution costs and was put on a three-month curfew.

...although I agree that it was still quite lenient. However, people would argue that a suspended sentence is still quite serious - do anything wrong and you'll get thrown inside straight away (or at least I hope that's the case and people don't get any more 'last' chances).

 

[anthony263]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-16755863

6 month suspended sentance? seriously?

It should of been attempted murder surely! 8/10 times he would of got dragged down onto the track?

I think the judge who decided this should get sent to prison....

I read about this earlier. That bloke who has been sentenced should be grateful he was not facing more serious charges especially if that man he pushed ended up under the train (he was lucky someone managed to pull him away)

 

[YorkshireBear]

I read about this earlier. That bloke who has been sentenced should be grateful he was not facing more serious charges especially if that man he pushed ended up under the train (he was lucky someone managed to pull him away)

Thats exactly what i though, he was lucky not to be dead so surely that should bring a higher charge!

And yes i understand he has a bit more than a suspended sentance but still very leniant.

 

[Requeststop]

Thats exactly what i though, he was lucky not to be dead so surely that should bring a higher charge!

And yes i understand he has a bit more than a suspended sentance but still very leniant.

Agreed - The buggar should have also been banned from all rail property for life.

 

[yorkie]

I read about this earlier. That bloke who has been sentenced should be grateful he was not facing more serious charges especially if that man he pushed ended up under the train (he was lucky someone managed to pull him away)

This is the UK, so he doesn't really need to be particularly lucky. It's standard practice to allow people to get away with all sorts of violent crime. Crimes involving money are considered much more serious than almost taking away someones life. Sadly I can't see justice happening any time soon. The sentence is absolutely disgusting but not surprising sadly.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I think the judge who decided this should get sent to prison....

I think we get into very dangerous territory if judges are to be sent to prison if someone disagrees with their sentencing.

Remember, we weren't there to hear the mitigation.

 

[scotsman]

Ah, but Judges have to sentence for what occurred, as opposed to what could/would/or was intended to have occurred.

What remains to be seen as whether it was intended to push him in to/under the train, or just assault

 

[ainsworth74]

I think the sentence is the correct length but it should not have been suspended he should actually have to serve it (and all of it at that I think having time off for good behaviour on sentences less than two years is stupid). Whilst I agree that his actions could have led to death/serious injury the fact remains they did not and I worry that punishing on the basis of what could happen rather than what actually happened is something of a slippery slope.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In the matter of legalistic terminology, what is the correct term that would be used by the police to describe the offence that occurred, from the visual evidence afforded by the CCTV evidence.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

In the matter of legalistic terminology, what is the correct term that would be used by the police to describe the offence that occurred, from the visual evidence afforded by the CCTV evidence.

Endangering the safety of persons on the railway.

 

[Badger]

I don't understand how this is any less than attempted murder?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I don't understand how this is any less than attempted murder?

Because attempted murder requires you to prove that the defendant intended to kill the victim in the first place. That's a very difficult thing to prove in momentary intention.

 

[Eagle]

Because attempted murder requires you to prove that the defendant intended to kill the victim in the first place. That's a very difficult thing to prove in momentary intention.

Exactly. If it had been a fatality the charge would probably be one of manslaughter.

 

[Minilad]

I think we get into very dangerous territory if judges are to be sent to prison if someone disagrees with their sentencing.

Remember, we weren't there to hear the mitigation.

I would love to know what possible mitigation there could be for doing such a thing. And please no one say drink or drugs

 

[Geezertronic]

10 seconds or so earlier and the victim could have fallen onto the track and may have been unable to get back up before the train went over him...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I would love to know what possible mitigation there could be for doing such a thing. And please no one say drink or drugs

Will we ever be told what the mitigating circumstances were in this case or is this deemed not to be put into the public domain and to remain sub judice

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Will we ever be told what the mitigating circumstances were in this case or is this deemed not to be put into the public domain and to remain sub judice

All court appearances, apart from cases involving minors or where the judge feels it is not appropriate, can be viewed by the public.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

All court appearances, apart from cases involving minors or where the judge feels it is not appropriate, can be viewed by the public.

If this is so, what were the mitigating circumstances in this case?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

If this is so, what were the mitigating circumstances in this case?

No idea, I wasn't there! Nevertheless his defence undoubtably put some form of mitigation across.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Nym]

Stupidity isn't a mitigation though...

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Stupidity isn't a mitigation though...

I beg to differ. Read the times law report on R v G & R. The judge stated that whilst the defendants could be accused of stupidity and lack of imagination if they genuinely did not perceive a risk from their actions then they should not be held accountable; and their convictions were quashed.

Anyway, this is very off-topic. My original point was that we were not there to hear the case and do not know what was said to make the judge give an admittedly light sentence.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[LE Greys]

Now, we don't know who said what to whom, or even whether the person who hit the train actually launched the attack. So this could have been anything from self-defence going too far to attempted murder via an arguement that got out of hand. The incident is alarmingly familiar from my point of view (except that it was a slow-moving HST in my case) but that never went to court, mostly because I never reported it.

 

[NSEFAN]

I beg to differ. Read the times law report on R v G & R. The judge stated that whilst the defendants could be accused of stupidity and lack of imagination if they genuinely did not perceive a risk from their actions then they should not be held accountable; and their convictions were quashed.

If a person is so stupid that they can't understand cause and effect, then they are a danger to themselves and others, so there is still good reason to lock them up (or at least prevent them from leaving the house without someone to look after them.)