What Will Be The Most Likely Outcome? (Gbh With Intent)(Updated)Victim Lying

[Unlucky1]

I was on a night out In town and there was a confrontation with me and another male at the top of some stairs in a club ,l was arguing with the man and then someone I knew saw and came over then the guy pushed him away then someone else I knew came over ( I was not with him ) and started arguing with the man about some thing that nothing to do with why I was arguing with him They were arguing about something that happend a couple of weeks before at a gym , then the guy that I knew started hitting him and I stood and watched,then the bouncer came and threw him out the victim had a fractured cheekbone me and another male have now been charged even though we genuinely did not hit the victim , the guy that hit him owned up to hitting him and the bouncer gave his statement and said he only saw one person hit him ,I gave my statement and said what happend and said I only saw one person hit him and the other male said he only saw one person hit him because that's what happend but the victim is saying more than one person hit him and the girl that he was with is also saying this I've seen the CCTV footage and you can see that the victim is being hit but you can't see who is hitting him all that is seen is me arguing with the guy and then the other guy coming over and then I go out of the sight of the CCTV then I reappear two minutes later and you can see the victim pushing my friend away when he came over to see what was going on rand the bouncer drags out the guy that he saw hit him ,the guy I was with and the guy that him are now being charged with gbh with intent even though two of us did not hit him I'm wondering what is likely to happen me and the other guy that didn't hit him, baring in mind the person that hit him owned up to hitting him and the bouncer said he only saw one person hit him hence why he only chucked one person out

[jennyjoan]

Pardon?

[boxtops]

This is so difficult to read, being all in one sentence and with no punctuation....

If you didn't hit him, why do you think something will happen to you?

[New Judge]

Without me reading it all is there any substantial difference between this and your earlier question? If so, what is it?

[Peter Pedant]

Hi unlucky ! you sure are unlucky with 5 answers and no response.

After all the *** comments about your English, I took time to read the script AND
you clearly have to wait and see...
you said you have given your statement and you have not said if you were bailed or not...
but either way you havae to wait and see.
from your point of view - the die is cast and you cannot now influence their decision.

The bouncer's statement for example is 'on your side' that you didnt do anything.

I am not sure why the five other posters have concluded from your grammar that you must be guilty or in some way blameworthy.... I am not sure that follows at all.

thanks for posting and keep us up to date - on t his thread rather than a new one

[Buenchico]

If you were charged and brought before the Crown Court (because GBH with intent cases can't be tried in a Magistrate's Court) the jury would have to consider TWO matters:
Firstly, they would need to consider whether there was sufficient evidence to prove, beyond reasonable doubt that you had directly assaulted the victim. Obviously, if the answer was 'Yes' they'd find you guilty. However if the answer is 'No' they'd then have to consider whether you were part of a group intent on assaulting the victim, even though you never even touched him. If they decided that the answer to that question was 'Yes' then they should still find you guilty.

There are currently calls for the law on 'joint enterprise' to be changed but, as it stands at the moment, anyone who is part of a group which commits an offence (even if that group member doesn't directly carry out any criminal act) is guilty of that offence. By failing to disassociate yourself from the fracas you have put yourself at serious risk of conviction for an offence which carries heavy penalties.

Other than in very exceptional circumstances (such as the offender being terminally ill) judges must always pass an immediate custodial sentence for a 'Section 18' offence. The absolute minimum sentence which can be passed is 2 years imprisonment, based upon a first-time offender who pleads guilty to a 'Category 3' offence (which you seem to be describing), with all relevant factors weighing in the offender's favour. If that offender was convicted after a trial the minimum sentence would be one of 3 years. Previous convictions (especially for violence) can push sentencing higher.

[Unlucky1]

Thank you peter ! I Was put on bail but now I'm being charged with my friend that didn't hit the victim and the person that did hit the victim they are jointly charging us ! It's quite funny because the person that hit the man also burgled my house when I was on holiday about a year ago and was arrested for it and now they are jointly charging us as if I would help him beat up someone he was arguing with that had nothing to do with me

[Unlucky1]

I wasn't with the person that hit him he came over and got involved and started arguing over something that had nothing to do with the original reason why we were arguing this same person burgled my house

[Peter Pedant]

Jordy boy - keep that up !

then you need to go out and hire a lawyer
( money I am afraid )
to defend it. I am not keen at all on people pleading guilty because they cant afford to defend....


I think BC has covered what would happen if things go wrong.....

[New Judge]

"I am not sure why the five other posters have concluded from your grammar that you must be guilty or in some way blameworthy.."

I'm not sure that any of us did that Peter. A little unfair if you don't mind me saying so. If you read some of my answers in "Law" you will find that I rarely, if ever, pass judgement. In this case (both questions) I could not understand with any accuracy what had occurred and did not really see why I should be required to unpick the detail.