Violent Crime involving Alcohol

In addition to his previous conviction for assualt (and suspended sentence) he also had previous convictions for road traffic offences, criminal damage and possession of a flick knife. I hardly imagine he only carried the flick knife while drunk - and what reason would someone have for carrying something like that except to use it? Why he was given that suspended sentence is beyond me. Regardless of being drunk he should have done time for it.

The previous assault was disgusting and it was only luck the victim didnt end up murdered as he was attacked with a knife and stabbed around the face/head and neck areas - he also had injuries to his hands - presumably from defending himself.

Does a life sentence mean life? Or will he be free again at some point (he is quite young).
 
There seems to be move in the UK towards much less leniency - particularly regarding burglary etc when the homeowner attempts to defend themselves. Hopefully this attitude will emerge here.

Also, in my local district court in relation to assault cases, the judge is becoming notorious for his responses to ..."my client had a lot of drink taken..." type defenses.

He normally says something along the lines of "So what?" or "I'm sick of this excuse for blatant thuggery".

Very few suspended sentences with this guy.
 
truthseeker said:
Does a life sentence mean life? Or will he be free again at some point (he is quite young).
Click to expand...
AFAIK most lifers get out on licence at some point (I'm thinking 7+ years). They can be put back in prison for any, or no, reason.
 
I like the cut of his jib!
 

That struck me when I read the report too, he bummed and received a cigarette from his victim and then followed him and attacked him viciously when he refused to give him a second cigarette. If his problem with drink is seen as a contributory factor to his behaviour it should be viewed not as an excuse for it but rather viewed as something he has not and does not appear to want to control and is therefore liable to continue to offend and be a danger to society, therefore he can't rehabilitate himself so should it not be taken in hand. Is it because the courts view themselves on a pedestal, almost as a vacuum and don't see the broader implication of crime and the potential of further crime on society. It was a total insult to the first victim for the sentence to have been suspended and fatal for the second.
 

Was there any mention of alcohol in the murder case?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register