Jump to content
IGNORED

In the Courts


wendyredredrobin

Recommended Posts

Am I correct in my understanding that Messrs Rooney and Tomlin are both due to make appearances today?

It is going to be interesting to see iif either of these are treated any differently to anyone else who might find themsrlves in a similar position.

Will be interesting to see how fair and unbiased the British legal system is, but I am predicting that both will get off fairly lightly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

How is it that LT is charged with GBH without intent?  Does that mean he lamped someone but didn't intend to hurt him? How can that be?

Will WR benefit from his previous good character or does he have form?

A defendant charged for GBH without intent does not necessarily mean that they inflicted less severe injuries to the victim. All the above injuries can be inflicted intentionally or recklessly, and this factor is what will ultimately determine the charge and punishment given.
It is not possible to attempt to commit a Section 20 GBH offence. If a defendant attempts to cause serious harm, it must be assumed that they intended to do so. To be charged for GBH without intent it is considered that the act was reckless. Under Section 20 GBH the defendant lacks the necessary mens rea for the more serious offence, meaning the defendant did not have the intention.

Seriously harming a victim without intent is a Section 20 Assault—a less serious form of GBH. Section 20 Assault, unlike Section 18 Assault (intentional), can be heard in both the Magistrates and Crown Courts albeit will normally be dealt with in the latter, and it carries a maximum sentence of five years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

A defendant charged for GBH without intent does not necessarily mean that they inflicted less severe injuries to the victim. All the above injuries can be inflicted intentionally or recklessly, and this factor is what will ultimately determine the charge and punishment given.
It is not possible to attempt to commit a Section 20 GBH offence. If a defendant attempts to cause serious harm, it must be assumed that they intended to do so. To be charged for GBH without intent it is considered that the act was reckless. Under Section 20 GBH the defendant lacks the necessary mens rea for the more serious offence, meaning the defendant did not have the intention.

Seriously harming a victim without intent is a Section 20 Assault—a less serious form of GBH. Section 20 Assault, unlike Section 18 Assault (intentional), can be heard in both the Magistrates and Crown Courts albeit will normally be dealt with in the latter, and it carries a maximum sentence of five years

Just a helpful pointer for those who haven't had to study legal Latin:

Actues Reus is the criminal deed (punching, glassing, stabbing etc.)

Mens Rea is the criminal thought (wanting to cause bodily injury).

Chris Rea is driving home for Christmas (unlike Rooney, possibly). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Just a helpful pointer for those who haven't had to study legal Latin:

Actues Reus is the criminal deed (punching, glassing, stabbing etc.)

Mens Rea is the criminal thought (wanting to cause bodily injury).

Chris Rea is driving home for Christmas (unlike Rooney, possibly). 

Blast! 

I was going to do the Chris Rea pun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cynic said:

If found guilty, and it being a magistrates court rather than crown court, he may well get a higher community order - up to 16 hours curfew, and up to 300 hours community work unpaid plus a gurt big fine. Or a suspended custodial sentence. If the magistrate is in a bad mood, maybe up to 18 months inside.

His previous conviction won't help and may be taken into consideration, although that was 6 years ago.

Whatever, he's doesn't exactly help himself does he :dunno:

 

 

 

A magistrate may only hand out a 6 month custodial sentence. 

If a Magistrate finds him guilty and considers his sentencing powers to be insufficient then they may send it to the crown court for sentencing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

Er, watch out. Last time there was a discussion on the second case you mention lots of irate folks went a bit OTT and the thread got red carded. 

The OP requested its removal. The thread did get a bit OTT so probably best consigned to the bin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...