Soldato
really, you think that's what you're doing? oh dear.
one victim gets a broken neck, judge gives suspended sentence...(Belvoir Hunt vs Hunt Monitors)
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
Don
Ok, what am I doing?
I’ve pointed out that:-
These guys didn’t break anyone’s neck
They are under no legal obigstion to say who did
Since they didn’t break anyone’s neck the reality is people tend not to get locked up for giving someone a punch and pushing the over as a first offence, especially when they plead guilty
There’s no doubt these guys are ****s for not naming them but the court can’t lock them up for that.
But hey, if you want to maintain the them and us narrative then I’m the 13th Duke of Wybourne, and I love a good day out fox hunting.
You could lock them up for the GBH and ABH they admited to though?
Also the theft they admited to?
And the destruction of property they admited to?
Don
Yes you could lock them up for any of them, but as I’ve pointed out for first offences courts generally don’t, particularly when they admit their guilt.
They were responsible for it though, it's like pointing out a gang boss who orders a murder didn't technically pull the trigger. These guys called "the boys" to come and rough up the hunt monitors and took part in that themselves, they didn't seem to have any sudden regrets or decide to call for an ambulance afterwards either.
Don
Go read the victims blog post, the victims make it clear it was the other group of men that broke the guys neck, not this pair.
Don
I don’t think there was any evidence provided that there was any intent to cause the serious injuries to the other guy and there certainly wasn’t evidence they knew he was seriously injured, it was the other guy that found them after searching for him.
doesn't really matter, they were still responsible for it (thus the guilty pleas for ABH, GBH), if someone is pushed into a ditch and suffers an injury as a result then that's their problem... if the guy with a broken neck had died then they'd be looking at a more serious charge too
as for not knowing he was seriously injured, they'd just roughed him up and thrown him into a ditch, it isn't exactly that remote a possibility that they caused him some injuries... the post was though that if this was just a heat of a moment thing/him just flipping then he could easily have checked - it is a bit ridiculous in the first place though given that he didn't just flip but instead called "the boys" and then waited before actually attacking
edit - autocorrect spelling issue
Last edited:
Don
I could be wrong here, but their charges were for the assault of the other guy, not the guy that broke his neck.
Soldato
gbh is a bit further up the scale than a bloody nose a pushing someone over
the blog entry posted by Tefal has some more details on the incident
"George Grant, terrier man for the Belvoir Hunt, and his son Thomas Grant pleaded guilty in early April at Leicester Crown Court to charges of grievous bodily harm on investigator Darryl Cunnington, actual bodily harm on myself,"
the GBH charge was because of the broken neck, the ABH charge was for the investigator who just got a bloody nose
Soldato
see above, they admitted to gbh on cunnington and abh on swain
Don
Drawing blood is all you need for a gbh charge, hence why a bloody nose from a punch is more than enough to land someone with a gbh charge.
Joint venture only comes into play as far as I’m aware if it can’t be identified who carried out the fatal blow - it’s proven beyond doubt these two guys weren’t involved in the other guys assaults by the victims own testimony.
Why do you try and deflect reasoned and robust argument to your position, is it because you realise you might be actually on shaky grounds with you legal knowledge and looking to play the man rather than the argument? Classic logical fallacy that you know.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,609
Ummmmm........
Well going to get a pickup filled with "the boys" is pretty scummy. They should 100% see jail time. This is definitely because they just have money and have bought their way out. There is a reason whole oh just be rich enough to not follow the rules joke exists....
Well going to get a pickup filled with "the boys" is pretty scummy. They should 100% see jail time. This is definitely because they just have money and have bought their way out. There is a reason whole oh just be rich enough to not follow the rules joke exists....
Don
I’ll take that back in that case, I can’t believe they plead guilty to the other attack given they weren’t directly involved.
Soldato
Without a shadow of doubt I’m on shaky ground with my legal knowledge. My legal knowledge is very limited. However i will steadfastly argue that both of these chaps received undue leniency for their crimes. I will also continue to play the man when the man tries to make light of what they did.
eh, the GBH charge was for the guy with the broken neck and they were ultimately responsible for it
suppose a crime boss orders a hit do you think he's not involved because he didn't pull the trigger? I don't see how you can say it is proven beyond doubt that these two guys weren't involved in the other guys assault - the key thing here is that they instigated the entire incident... not to mention they themselves pleaded guilty to it.
they're the guys who "called in the boys" and so they're responsible for the GBH and the ABH - it doesn't matter if the broken neck wasn't intentional either
Don
I could accept that they were guilty of the ABH of the other fellow on the basis of calling in the boys, but I don’t believe there was intent to make it more serious than a push and a shove to scare them off (if the mob call a hit there is a clear intent to kill).
Either way there was a clear GBH of the guy left bloodied and possibly not on the guy with a broken neck (do broken bones count as GBH?), so odd they plead guilty to GBH to one and not the other.
it is the result that made it GBH... they clearly intended to rough up both of them thus called the boys and took part in that roughing up themselves.
AFAIK you don't have to intend to cause the specific injury in order to end up with a GBH charge - if you (for example) punch someone then the severity of the charge can be based on the extent of their injuries, people have died from a single punch etc.. and assault in one case could be GBH in another and manslaughter in another as a result of the state of the victim but with no real change in the intent of the attacker(s) - someone falls and hits their head badly and what could have been assault turns into manslaughter
I don't think it is odd they pleaded guilty, they probably had sound legal advice and they were ultimately responsible for the attack, a broken neck is rather more serious than a bloody nose