Jump to content
IGNORED

Bristol R*vers dustbin thread


42nite

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Scrumpylegs said:

Barton won’t get a fine. Not a chance. Best case scenario is a suspended prison sentence and he loses all ‘credit’ for taking this to trial. Offence is made more serious by previous violent offences. Also, the fact the the assault has happened in the workplace won’t play well!!

I found it odd that he pleaded not guilty back in 2019.

That's going to go against him in sentencing if he is found guilty.

 

Edit to clarify when he entered that plea.

Edited by Eddie Hitler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TomF said:

Max 5 years but could be anything from that to a community service or  just a fine. Given they postponed the trial for a year I get the felling if found guilty he'll get community service

Whilst i agree @TomF that the max sentence for a S47 ABH is up to 5 years; you need to realise that Barton has already had custodial sentences for like offences.

With that in mind, the non-custodial options open to the sentencing judge will be somewhat limited.

Any sentence under 2 years can be suspended, and that is of course what his defence counsel would push for in the event of a jury verdict.

The amount of bad character against him, will play a big part; if it is his case that it was self defence.

Jury selection will be interesting. No doubt, anybody who has heard of barton will be excluded via a questionaire completed at the start of the selection process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, lenred said:

Is that the offence - pushing (sorry not followed the case)?!

 

It doesn't matter how the injuries were caused; the police officer who pushed Ian Tomlinson over leading to his death was charged with manslaughter rather than with, and I know you're not trying to downplay what happened, "pushing".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

It doesn't matter how the injuries were caused; the police officer who pushed Ian Tomlinson over leading to his death was charged with manslaughter rather than with, and I know you're not trying to downplay what happened, "pushing".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson

 

 

I didn’t say it mattered? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

It doesn't matter how the injuries were caused; the police officer who pushed Ian Tomlinson over leading to his death was charged with manslaughter rather than with, and I know you're not trying to downplay what happened, "pushing".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson

 

 

But was subsequently acquitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, lenred said:

Is that the offence - pushing (sorry not followed the case)?!

The offence is ABH  "According to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the offence of ABH is committed ‘when a person intentionally or recklessly assaults another… causing actual bodily harm’."

From the prosecutions case today Barton was intent on getting into a scrap with Stendel (or a pushing match) which caused Stendel to fall off balance and hit the side of the tunnel causing injury including the tooth coming loose from the bone. 

This seems like it'll be a category 3 (although could be a stage 2). 

"The sentencing guidelines for ABH fall into three categories, with 

Category 1 is the most serious and involving greater harm and high culpability. 

Category 2 involves either more significant harm but lower culpability or lesser harm and higher culpability

Category 3 involves lesser harm and lower culpability."

Given Joey's past History it could honestly go either way if he's found guilty he could be locked up or given another suspended sentence 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BetterRedthenBlue said:

The offence is ABH  "According to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the offence of ABH is committed ‘when a person intentionally or recklessly assaults another… causing actual bodily harm’."

From the prosecutions case today Barton was intent on getting into a scrap with Stendel (or a pushing match) which caused Stendel to fall off balance and hit the side of the tunnel causing injury including the tooth coming loose from the bone. 

This seems like it'll be a category 3 (although could be a stage 2). 

"The sentencing guidelines for ABH fall into three categories, with 

Category 1 is the most serious and involving greater harm and high culpability. 

Category 2 involves either more significant harm but lower culpability or lesser harm and higher culpability

Category 3 involves lesser harm and lower culpability."

Given Joey's past History it could honestly go either way if he's found guilty he could be locked up or given another suspended sentence 

Good points.

The Crown doesn't have to prove intent for an ABH conviction, just casuality of the injury, even through transferred malice, or recklessness.

I.e if you threw a stone at a window to cause damage; and it rebounded into someone's face causing injury, you would still be done for assault; as you were doing an inherently criminal act.

The fact that Stendel's back was turned away from Barton kind of negates the defence of self defence.

I think his defence counsel knows that he's on a hiding to nothing with this case, particulary as it's been witnessed by independents.

Then again, Stokes got off ( Due to a massive CPS blunder). So anything is possible. 

Edited by NcnsBcfc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BetterRedthenBlue said:

The offence is ABH  "According to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the offence of ABH is committed ‘when a person intentionally or recklessly assaults another… causing actual bodily harm’."

From the prosecutions case today Barton was intent on getting into a scrap with Stendel (or a pushing match) which caused Stendel to fall off balance and hit the side of the tunnel causing injury including the tooth coming loose from the bone. 

This seems like it'll be a category 3 (although could be a stage 2). 

"The sentencing guidelines for ABH fall into three categories, with 

Category 1 is the most serious and involving greater harm and high culpability. 

Category 2 involves either more significant harm but lower culpability or lesser harm and higher culpability

Category 3 involves lesser harm and lower culpability."

Given Joey's past History it could honestly go either way if he's found guilty he could be locked up or given another suspended sentence 

Thanks BRB ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

He has a record of violent crime. Agreed.

It's not like it's a one off out of character event. Agreed.

But this current offence is surely less serious than the previous one (OK, previous two or three or four....?)

2 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Whilst i agree @TomF that the max sentence for a S47 ABH is up to 5 years; you need to realise that Barton has already had custodial sentences for like offences.

With that in mind, the non-custodial options open to the sentencing judge will be somewhat limited.

Any sentence under 2 years can be suspended, and that is of course what his defence counsel would push for in the event of a jury verdict.

The amount of bad character against him, will play a big part; if it is his case that it was self defence.

 

My understanding is that JB has simply pleaded Not Guilty, i.e. not even that the alleged offence was committed in self defence.

2 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I doubt it's a category 3 offence. More like a 2, down to the level of injury. A chipped tooth?

Even within thise categories you have A,B & C levels.

Even it is finally classed as a Category 2 (for a push?), and notwithstanding aggravating factors such as, inter alia, previous convictions, surely this is a case of both Lower Harm and Lesser Culpability. 

My bet is 12 months suspended (maximum).

Edited by PHILINFRANCE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking into account his previous convictions for violent offences and his “not guilty” plea I would be somewhat surprised if he wasn’t jailed if he is indeed found guilty.

No suspended sentence nonsense please - JUST SEND HIM DOWN!

Edited by Shelton’s Love Gravy
I accidentally wrote the word “found” twice. Arrrrrgggghhhh!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the fact that he is well known will go against him. Courts have a tendency to be less lenient when sentencing high profile cases. You never know though - he might be acquitted - although few on this forum seem to be considering the possibility that he didn’t do it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

But this current offence is surely less serious than the previous one (OK, previous two or three or four....?)

My understanding is that JB has simply pleaded Not Guilty, i.e. not even that the alleged offence was committed in self defence.

My bet is 12 months suspended (maximum).

Prior to the start of the trial, his defence team would have had to serve a DCS (Defence case statement) outlining what his defence/issue is with the indictment (charge). In that way, all parties know what the issues are in advance.

I'm guessing; but given it was on CCTV and witnessed; he will go down the route of it being accidental; and he stumbled forward whilst trying to stop himself.  Or some other creative defence like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Barfon would have an arse like a dustbin if he goes down. He would be someone's bitch in seconds!

He wouldn’t, though, would he?

He is ‘quIte’ hard himself and has money.

He also has influential ‘friends’, including a convicted Police killer.

Should he be imprisoned, which I doubt, he will no doubt be feted by his fellow prisoners.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Prior to the start of the trial, his defence team would have had to serve a DCS (Defence case statement) outlining what his defence/issue is with the indictment (charge). In that way, all parties know what the issues are in advance.

I'm guessing; but given it was on CCTV and witnessed; he will go down the route of it being accidental; and he stumbled forward whilst trying to stop himself.  Or some other creative defence like that.

À propos creative defences, I am sure you recall Sir Alex Ferguson’s totally credible excuse for speeding/driving on the hard shoulder of a motorway, i.e. he had an extreme case of diahorrea (spelling) and was desperate to get to a toilet.
He was acquitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

He wouldn’t, though, would he?

He is ‘quIte’ hard himself and has money.

He also has influential ‘friends’, including a convicted Police killer.

Should he be imprisoned, which I doubt, he will no doubt be feted by his fellow prisoners.

Yep someone will be holding his pocket walking around 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

He wouldn’t, though, would he?

He is ‘quIte’ hard himself and has money.

He also has influential ‘friends’, including a convicted Police killer.

Should he be imprisoned, which I doubt, he will no doubt be feted by his fellow prisoners.

With his arrogance? Can't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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