Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
studmuffin

Teen broke victim's nose in unprovoked attack

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Max Power said:

Had my nose broken a couple of times, it never went to court...

What about the rest of you?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2019 at 11:29 PM, Chris C said:

They're not visitors, they live here.

I don't think this one has lived here long, probably one of those "skilled" hotel workers we weakened the work permit for, not exactly "low risk" when he has already attacked a kid for no reason and isn't being deported it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Government entirely to blame.

Edited by Lagman
Error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2019 at 12:34 PM, gettafa said:

"A probation report assessed Pszczolkowski as a low risk of reoffending and of harm to the public."

htf can anyone tell? The facts of the serious crime should stand on their own. There is no mitigation for punching fuck out of a stranger in an unprovoked attack

"But Mrs Hughes said she had taken into account Pszczolkowski’s young age, his lack of previous convictions, his guilty plea, and his demonstration of remorse and that she was satisfied that this was a one-off incident."

"...his guilty plea "- How is that relevant? He was pissed, there were plenty of witnesses in a public place, he had no choice other than to accept he was guilty

"..lack of previous convictions" - How is it relevant if there were no previous conviction? I agree it is relevant if there had been previous convictions.

"..demonstration of remorse- Again, how is that relevant? I agree it is relevant if there had been no demonstration of remorse.

I think Ms Hughes is one to watch.

 

 

 

Just Kalergi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lagman said:

Just Kalergi.

??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hughes is at least better than the nasty piece of work that left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gettafa said:

Hughes is at least better than the nasty piece of work that left.

Marginal at best...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2019 at 12:34 PM, gettafa said:

"A probation report assessed Pszczolkowski as a low risk of reoffending and of harm to the public."

htf can anyone tell? The facts of the serious crime should stand on their own. There is no mitigation for punching fuck out of a stranger in an unprovoked attack

"But Mrs Hughes said she had taken into account Pszczolkowski’s young age, his lack of previous convictions, his guilty plea, and his demonstration of remorse and that she was satisfied that this was a one-off incident."

"...his guilty plea "- How is that relevant? He was pissed, there were plenty of witnesses in a public place, he had no choice other than to accept he was guilty

"..lack of previous convictions" - How is it relevant if there were no previous conviction? I agree it is relevant if there had been previous convictions.

"..demonstration of remorse- Again, how is that relevant? I agree it is relevant if there had been no demonstration of remorse.

I think Ms Hughes is one to watch.

Actually what she is doing is demonstrating how sentencing is done.  A judge starts off looking at the maximum sentence for the offence and then reduce it to account for mitigating factors, such as those listed, rather than  increasing from a minimum because those factors are absent or even counter-indicated (eg a defendant saying they had no remorse and would do it again). 

There's actually not a lot of flexibility in the sentence that can be given as there are rules to be followed and a set of criteria to be taken into account when working it out.  And if a judge gets it wrong (either too harsh or too lenient) the sentence can be appealed against. because the guidelines weren't followed.  So they normally explain how they came to their decision as Jayne Hughes did there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Above two posts, thanks.

But I just feel it is wrong that there can be any mitigation whatsoever that someone can assault a person where there has been no provocation. Lock the little shit up in a cell for a few months to let them ponder over their evil violent ways.

I don't care how drunk they was, I don't care how sweet and mild they has been all this time (or perhaps they was never caught). An unprovoked attacker needs removing from society to make society safe. That is what prison is for.

Locking little violent shits up.

ps I am not a high court judge.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep people like this fella away from the demon drink.

Impose a 5 years pub ban and from other premises with an alcohol licence. If those premises break the ban or if anyone supplies him with alcohol then they should face the court, the premises should forfeit their licence for a year and the offender gets an automatic 3 year custodial sentence.

Why do people ignore the elephant in the room when it comes to drink related violence?  There's really no excuse.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...