Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Student Jailed
Good.
Was he lucky not to have been charged with a more serious offence?
The film in the link is terrifying - had the extinguisher landed a few inches to its left the policeman would have been killed. Media URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8252480/Tuition-fees-sixth-form-student-jailed-for-throwing-fire-extinguisher.html
Description:
Was he lucky not to have been charged with a more serious offence?
The film in the link is terrifying - had the extinguisher landed a few inches to its left the policeman would have been killed. Media URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8252480/Tuition-fees-sixth-form-student-jailed-for-throwing-fire-extinguisher.html
Description:
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flip_flop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
NJ, I take your point. Mine is that people should be judged for their actions: what de did was throw/drop a heavy object, and clearly that is what people on this thread are criticising him for (correctly). Offences such as 'violent disorder' seem to me to be catch-alls for when you can't actually pin anything on anyone; that was not the case here. He should have been charged with whatever dropping heavy objects amounts to. The idea that you can 'commit violent disorder' seems to me to stretch the English language unduly.
I'm not arguing with your interpretation of the law, just saying I think the law is wrong.
I'm not arguing with your interpretation of the law, just saying I think the law is wrong.
Cannot agree with the usually sensible and reliable squad on this one. Chucking a lump of metal off a seven storey building onto a crowd of people, whoever they are, is totally brainless. My God he is lucky to have missed every single human head. He deserves everything he gets. Heat of the moment my a**e.
I agree with others that the sentence was rather harsh, as the charge being, 'committing violent disorder'.
I would have thought the charge would have been 'committing an act likely to endanger life'.This then may have attracted such a long sentence, but 'committing violent disorder'???
There are hundreds of youngsters committing violent disorder every weekend, and get away scot free.
Yes I know his action could have killed someone, but it didn't.
Take the following analogys,
A car is being chased by the police down the road and the car mounts the pavement and pedestrians have to leap out of the way to avoid being killed.
Now, someone could have been killed but weren't, so would the driver be given a 2 years 8 months jail sentence? I very much doubt it.
A gang of youths gather on a motorway bridge, one of them hurls a large object onto the carriageway, now it could have killed someone but it didn't.
Would he have also been given a 2 years 8 months jail sentence? Once again I doubt it.
I would have thought the charge would have been 'committing an act likely to endanger life'.This then may have attracted such a long sentence, but 'committing violent disorder'???
There are hundreds of youngsters committing violent disorder every weekend, and get away scot free.
Yes I know his action could have killed someone, but it didn't.
Take the following analogys,
A car is being chased by the police down the road and the car mounts the pavement and pedestrians have to leap out of the way to avoid being killed.
Now, someone could have been killed but weren't, so would the driver be given a 2 years 8 months jail sentence? I very much doubt it.
A gang of youths gather on a motorway bridge, one of them hurls a large object onto the carriageway, now it could have killed someone but it didn't.
Would he have also been given a 2 years 8 months jail sentence? Once again I doubt it.
Seems to me that had the sentence been too lenient then you would've had a public outcry with the public and the tabloids baying for his blood and that the law and judge involved are incompetent and if he had given him the full 5 year wack as a scapegoat then it's a possibility that his family would've lodged a complaint and he would've got his sentence reduce on appeal imo the so the judge gave him a middle of the road sentence to make both sides happy and in doing this everyone is not exactly happy but not exactly miserable about the sentence either (Except the culprit himself) The good thing about this is that in the future anyone thinking about committing violent acts and ruining their careers will choose a less violent method to vent their anger.
The analogies you use, AOG, are not entirely appropriate.
As I have said (twice) there is a vital difference between Violent Disorder and the type of “solo” crimes you compare this incident with.
“A feature of the offence is that it is not the individual conduct of one offender that is of importance but the nature of the offending as a whole.”
It is the totality of the incident which went a long way to attracting a lengthy custodial sentence. It may seem that Mr Woolard is being punished for the actions of others, but that is a feature of this particular Public Order offence – a feature that has been confirmed by the Court of Appeal.
He has not been jailed for what might have occurred but what did actually occur. It is clear that the incident in which he took part was a seriously violent event, hence the sentence which consider was in accordance with the sentencing guidelines.
As I have said (twice) there is a vital difference between Violent Disorder and the type of “solo” crimes you compare this incident with.
“A feature of the offence is that it is not the individual conduct of one offender that is of importance but the nature of the offending as a whole.”
It is the totality of the incident which went a long way to attracting a lengthy custodial sentence. It may seem that Mr Woolard is being punished for the actions of others, but that is a feature of this particular Public Order offence – a feature that has been confirmed by the Court of Appeal.
He has not been jailed for what might have occurred but what did actually occur. It is clear that the incident in which he took part was a seriously violent event, hence the sentence which consider was in accordance with the sentencing guidelines.
