gbh section 18

[inocent1986]

me and my familly have been harrassed by a neighbour for 8 years we always phoned the police they did nothing except keep warning them for 8 years. recently the neighbours brother hit me for no reason he was very drunk i acted in self defence and hit him back he sufferd a broken jaw im getting done in court now. the one taking me to court is trying to get me done for section 18 but solicitor said if i was guilty it would be a section 20 not 18. he admitted being drunk in his statement a witness came forward on my behalf. not long after the one that is taking me to court had my witness beaten up and was put in hospital for 4 days it was all caught on cctv footage there were to people one was hitting my witness while on floor the other was standing there encouraging him to keep hitting the one that was hitting was caught with no insurance and is going to court and the other got off with a warning i have made the police aware that he was my witness but said it is a seperate issue which is not the case at all they have threatend my familly with death recently but police said no evidence of this and did nothing they still harrass us but get away with it they all have previouse convictions and are in their 30s to 40s im 25 years old never been in trouble with the police in my life. please comment on this thanks.

[exdc]

Hi Inocent

Have you been charged with the Sec 18 offence or Sec 20 GBH?.

I agree that the Sec 20 offence is more the likely outcome, unless of course, Intent to cause Serious injury / Grevious harm is proved or admitted.

Now that you have been charged your legal rep will receive the basic file of evidence agaisnt you (advanced disclosure) and they will take it from there.

(Just for your info, its not the complainant who decides whether to take you to court for a specific offence i.e . Sec 18 or the Sec 20 etc).

[bednobs]

move house?

[exdc]

Sorry, I should have said that I agree that the Sec 20 offence is more the likely outcome, IF you admit or are found guilty. Self-defence is a statutory defence to assault and The burden of proof remains with the prosecution when the issue of self-defence is raised.

The basic principles of self-defence are set out in (Palmer v R, [1971] AC 814); approved in R v McInnes, 55 Cr App R 551:

"It is both good law and good sense that a man who is attacked may defend himself. It is both good law and good sense that he may do, but only do, what is reasonably necessary."

[inocent1986]

i have my trial in february pleaded not guilty there is no evidence against me no witnesses on his side. i have 4 witnesses on my behalf but they did not see when he attacked me they previously saw him drunk and abusive and thats what they are coming forward for. judge said to drop it to a section 20 but his barrister was adimant to go for section 18 judge kept asking him r u sure so dont now whats happening there. he admitted drinking 8 cans of carling that day in his statement was not correct on the clothing i was wearing which a police officer can put him right as he saw what i was wearing. my barrister said its looking good for me and said if i do get charged with anything its gonna be for using to much force any ideas what is likely to happen? thanks for all ur responses so far