ChatterBank2 mins ago
ABH charge - what will I get sentenced
20 Answers
I had a near miss with a cyclist where as there was a cycle route across the road and he came straight infront of me.
I pulled over and got out of the car as the cyclist was gesturing and mouthing off. I approached him and he walked towards me.
We had words and in the end I pushed him away and walked off, as he was still straddled across his bike he lost his balance and fell down a small embankment and hit his head on a steel gurder. Subsequently cutting his head with a 2" gash.
I had my son with me in the car and panicked a little and got back in the car and drove up to a security gate, told the security guard I had been involved in an incident and the guy needed an ambulance and said I would drop my son off and come back to the security house, which I did.
Ambulance turned up, then the police.
I was then cautioned and gave a statement on site which I signed. I admitted that I was annoyed and pushed the guy but with no intent to cause him harm.
I am now worried as I have been researching online and come to the conclusion that as I have a previous DD charge from 2005 this is not my first offence and this will be an ABH charge. Looking at the sentence it says that prison is on the cards.
The police office told me that it could be either a caution or a summons, does anyone have any good information for me?
I pulled over and got out of the car as the cyclist was gesturing and mouthing off. I approached him and he walked towards me.
We had words and in the end I pushed him away and walked off, as he was still straddled across his bike he lost his balance and fell down a small embankment and hit his head on a steel gurder. Subsequently cutting his head with a 2" gash.
I had my son with me in the car and panicked a little and got back in the car and drove up to a security gate, told the security guard I had been involved in an incident and the guy needed an ambulance and said I would drop my son off and come back to the security house, which I did.
Ambulance turned up, then the police.
I was then cautioned and gave a statement on site which I signed. I admitted that I was annoyed and pushed the guy but with no intent to cause him harm.
I am now worried as I have been researching online and come to the conclusion that as I have a previous DD charge from 2005 this is not my first offence and this will be an ABH charge. Looking at the sentence it says that prison is on the cards.
The police office told me that it could be either a caution or a summons, does anyone have any good information for me?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by trigger1971. 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.Trigger, it seems to me you have behaved in thoughtless way even tho' you say cyclist "mouthed" you. Passengers cannot be witnesses in a motor accident. You have aggravated a possible driving offence by apparently phsically harming the cyclist. You should have tried to make peace. Dunno, but looks black to me. Driving maybe reduced to careless. always pull out and away from cyclists as they can wobble. GBH seems possble. SEE Lawyer TODAY!
Trigger, Eddies51 may call my answer rubbish but time will tell. Do not let this ignoramus give you false hopes. I wish you well despite your actions but see a solictor and get advice from your Insurance Company. If it goes to court, make sue you turn up and hope cyclist, if a police witness, does not. Hope when I'm driving I never meet Eddies51 for whom everything seems to go - he'll crash me and drive off (he thinks).
If it's 2 inch gash that required sutures then technically that can be a wounding/GBH charge.
That said, I doubt you'd receive a custodial sentence in any case so don't fret too much about it. You might want to think about being less confrontational though in light of recent high profile incidents involving cyclists.
That said, I doubt you'd receive a custodial sentence in any case so don't fret too much about it. You might want to think about being less confrontational though in light of recent high profile incidents involving cyclists.
Both ABH and Sec 20 GBH are offences of 'basic intent' (can be committed recklessly). Grievous bodily harm (GBH) means really serious bodily harm. Although it is for the jury to decide whether the harm is really serious.
CPS guidelines states, "An offence contrary to section 20 should be reserved for those wounds considered to be really serious .
CPS guidelines states, "An offence contrary to section 20 should be reserved for those wounds considered to be really serious .
Thanks exdc that confirms my idea that this would not rate as a section 20 and stays as ABH . Does it make a difference that the cut head was incidental to the push ? In that the push caused the cyclist to fall down the embankment and as a result cut his head ? In another place the push would have not caused an injury .
Hi Eddie,
"Does it make a difference that the cut head was incidental to the push ? In that the push caused the cyclist to fall down the embankment and as a result cut his head "
The unlawful push caused to cyclist to fall then sustained the 'indirect' injury.
ABH = Assault Occasioning actual bodily harm. Occasioning: means to cause, and there must be both factual and legal causation. The Defendant’s conduct must cause the ABH. In relation to causation in law there must be a culpable act that must be substantial and operative and there must be an unbroken chain. No need to show accused intended or was reckless to causing ABH.
However, the mens rea for Sec 20 wounding (not GBH) is maliciously. It was confirmed by the House of Lords in Savage; Parmenter that the Defendant acts maliciously if he intends his actions to CAUSE SOME HARM to another or is subjectively reckless that his actions might cause some harm. Not necessary for the Defendant to foresee a wound or GBH. Proof that the Defendant foresaw some harm might occur as opposed to would occur suffices: DPP v. DA.
Here is the case law DPP v Parmenter [1991]. (See how the Sec 20 got knocked down to ABH).
The defendant had caused injury to his young baby by tossing him about in a way which would have been acceptable with an older child, but not with one so young. He did not realise that he might cause harm by this action. The House of Lords held that he could not be liable under s20 as he had not foreseen the risk of any harm. It was not necessary under s20 that he foresee the grievous bodily harm which must be caused, but the defendant must foresee that he might cause some harm. An alternative verdict under s47 was substituted.
This is a basic explanation as there is tons and tons of case law on this subject.
"Does it make a difference that the cut head was incidental to the push ? In that the push caused the cyclist to fall down the embankment and as a result cut his head "
The unlawful push caused to cyclist to fall then sustained the 'indirect' injury.
ABH = Assault Occasioning actual bodily harm. Occasioning: means to cause, and there must be both factual and legal causation. The Defendant’s conduct must cause the ABH. In relation to causation in law there must be a culpable act that must be substantial and operative and there must be an unbroken chain. No need to show accused intended or was reckless to causing ABH.
However, the mens rea for Sec 20 wounding (not GBH) is maliciously. It was confirmed by the House of Lords in Savage; Parmenter that the Defendant acts maliciously if he intends his actions to CAUSE SOME HARM to another or is subjectively reckless that his actions might cause some harm. Not necessary for the Defendant to foresee a wound or GBH. Proof that the Defendant foresaw some harm might occur as opposed to would occur suffices: DPP v. DA.
Here is the case law DPP v Parmenter [1991]. (See how the Sec 20 got knocked down to ABH).
The defendant had caused injury to his young baby by tossing him about in a way which would have been acceptable with an older child, but not with one so young. He did not realise that he might cause harm by this action. The House of Lords held that he could not be liable under s20 as he had not foreseen the risk of any harm. It was not necessary under s20 that he foresee the grievous bodily harm which must be caused, but the defendant must foresee that he might cause some harm. An alternative verdict under s47 was substituted.
This is a basic explanation as there is tons and tons of case law on this subject.
Trigger1971
Don't let the nonsense I have written above cause you any concern, its just to highlight difference's in the grading of assaults concerning ABH and Wounding offences.
Although technically the injuries etc you describe could amount to either one of those offences, I agree with Eddie in that IF the police and complainant pursue this matter then they should be looking at the less serious offence of ABH or even a Common assault. A custodial sentence is highly unlikely.
Hopefully, it was a Traffic Police Unit who attended, they are notoriously idol and useless when it comes to proper police work / crime.
Don't let the nonsense I have written above cause you any concern, its just to highlight difference's in the grading of assaults concerning ABH and Wounding offences.
Although technically the injuries etc you describe could amount to either one of those offences, I agree with Eddie in that IF the police and complainant pursue this matter then they should be looking at the less serious offence of ABH or even a Common assault. A custodial sentence is highly unlikely.
Hopefully, it was a Traffic Police Unit who attended, they are notoriously idol and useless when it comes to proper police work / crime.
My comments were obiously incomplete as judged by replies. I've never believed you will receive a custodial sentence. My concern is your driving license and behaviour to cyclist. When involved in bad accident and although interviewed on site another PC another policeman visited me to ascertain my side and sounded kind when I challenged a witness statement, saying "don't worry, nothing might happen". Many weeks/ months later, going thro' post I opened a small brown envelope with charge of DD but if pleading guilty might be just Careless Driving. I intended pleading not guilty but professioal advisor said "why pay £1000 for representative & costs when you WILL be found guilty?. Result: £400 fine and 7 points on license for "Careless D". When 1st receiving charge I panicked as to my insurance as DD/CD are Criminal Offences. I phoned my Insurance Co and advisor laughed saying "that's no prob when you plead guilty, we will continue your insurance of course, that's what we are here for!" He continued! "IF THE POLICE ATTEND AN ACCIDENT THEY ALWAYS CHARGE SOMEBODY" So my response to you was not gueswork and have not been talking thro' my a**se.
-- answer removed --
Sorry Trigger but there seems someting fishy about this question. Driving off when a cyclist is bleeding in ditch seems callous. No mobile phone to contact 999? Your son was safe in the car so no hurry to "drop him off". You have not set your son a good example of how to behave. Even the mouthing at you isn't explained - I doubt if the cyclist was psychotic out for trouble. If only you had swallowed the mouthing and made peace you would not be in the situation of worry that you are.
However this debate can be an education to us all if you tell us the final outcome. Thanks ronni21 for your honesty, you have paid your price and cannot be criticised at all. Wish I could change my name, based on crossords, to maybe "slowontheuptake" or summit, lol.
However this debate can be an education to us all if you tell us the final outcome. Thanks ronni21 for your honesty, you have paid your price and cannot be criticised at all. Wish I could change my name, based on crossords, to maybe "slowontheuptake" or summit, lol.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.