Is 12 Weeks The Maximum This Piece Of Scum Could Be Given?

[youngmafbog]

Seems a ludicrously light sentence to me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4102668/Paramedic-left-bloodied-face-attacked-drunken-yob-trying-TREAT.html

[trt]

As long as theses light sentences are given out, there will always be assaults on the good people we depend on.

For all we know, somebody could have died waiting for an ambulance, while they attended this moron!

[andy-hughes]

It must be, or he would have probably been given more.

[ummmm]

If it wasn't a paramedic he punched he would have got off.

[youngmafbog]

Not sure Andy, that is why I asked the question, especially since the WMAS seem to think is is not enough:

//WMAS General Manager for Birmingham, Nathan Hudson, said: 'We welcome the fact that a custodial sentence has been issued in this case but are disappointed it is not longer
//

[youngmafbog]

I just dont find it acceptable that any public servant has to have the risk of injury doing their job which is to help people. OK the Police Force is different but no Ambulance, fire doctors Nurses social workers etc.

And 12 weeks, probably ending up 6 with a paltry fine is not a deterrent at all.

[ummmm]

I don't find any violence acceptable. I think the sentence is adequate though. In reality he punched him and gave him a nose bleed.

[New Judge]

Looking at Mr Burness’s injuries I find it hard to believe he was charged only with Common Assault (the mentioned charge of “assault by beating” is a variant of Common Assault. But that’s a matter for the CPS who have full details of the matter. We only have a picture from the Daily Mail. The maximum sentence for Common Assault is six months. Assuming he pleaded guilty (there is no indication he did not) the maximum he can be given is four months, so three months is not as lenient as it initially sounds.

He will only serve six weeks. Also there is mention of a fine. He would not have been fined in addition to a custodial sentence. What would have been imposed is a surcharge of £115 and £85 prosecution costs. I can’t think what the other £65 might be for. Possibly compensation, but it seems a funny amount.

[hereIam]

He's a yob and he'll still be a yob after serving a measly six weeks !

[EDDIE51]

The offence charged was 'Assault by beating' the maximum sentence for this is 6 months. He pleaded guilty so he gets the automatic 1/3rd reduction so in this case 4 months is the maximum he could have been given, he got 3 months (12 weeks) which is near the maximum possible under the circumstances
There would have been mitigating circumstances which of course the 'Wail' misses out. I expect that as he was unconscious and came round to find someone bending over him with their hands on him , his defence was that he mistook the paramedic for an attacker and it was 'self defence'

[hc4361]

Eddie, before he headbutted the paramedic he threw a beer can at a female member of the ambulance crew and squared up to her. When the victim tried to calm him down, he got headbutted.

It wasn't a case of him coming round and lashing out in a confused state

[youngmafbog]

//There would have been mitigating circumstances//

Of course, no surprise the belleding heart liberals find sympathy for the perpetrator and not the victim.

[ummmm]

Who has shown sympathy perpetrator?

[youngmafbog]

Look 3 up.

[ummmm]

That's not sympathy, that's an attempt at an explanation why the man hit out as he did. It was actually my first thought.

[Mamyalynne]

No one has sympathised with the assailant, I rather doubt anyone would.

We are daily appalled at what we see as insufficient penalties for wrongdoings but we aren't usually in full possession of all the facts and we certainly don't have the job of administering the law.

[EDDIE51]

If you mean me I have simply pointed out that the sentence is near the maximum possible for the offence after a guilty plea. I have not shown sympathy for the perpetrator.
We constantly see complaints about ' light' sentences but in every case I have looked at, the complaint is not justified as it was within guidelines for the offence.

[Orderlimit]

"There would have been mitigating circumstances which of course the 'Wail' misses out" What were these mitigating circumstances the 'Wail' left out Eddie?

[New Judge]

Readers should also bear in mind this: as well as a “maximum” sentence for each offence there are also sentencing guidelines. These provide a “starting point” for sentencing a first time offender pleading Not Guilty (but being found guilty at trial). The starting point for the most serious (Category One) example of Common Assault is a High Level Community Order. So in this case the court has bumped up the level of sentence quite considerably from the starting point. We don’t know the defendant’s previous record and we don’t know the full details which were available to the sentencing Bench.

As Eddie has said, time and again here on AB we see criticism – which is often levelled against the judge or Magistrates - of lenient sentences. But when the facts of the matter and the guidelines are examined it nearly always turns out that the court has not been unduly lenient. Of course it may be that the guidelines seem unduly moderate but very often the courts are acting in accordance with them, which they are obliged by law to do.

[EDDIE51]

Orderlimit I am surmising that the assailant offered a defence or mitigation. I was not present at the court hearing. So I have offered as a suggestion, a defence / mitigation that to me seems to be a possibility given the circumstances. Possibly you have more knowledge of the case and can offer a better suggestion?