Leeds fan jailed for 12 weeks

[Callum_62]

For assaulting Eddie Howe

Anyone else think a 3 month jail sentence looks extremely harsh?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/23877431/man-jailed-attack-eddie-howe-leeds-newcastle/

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

For assaulting Eddie Howe

Anyone else think a 3 month jail sentence looks extremely harsh?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/23877431/man-jailed-attack-eddie-howe-leeds-newcastle/

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

12 weeks is fine but it should be home detention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Silky]

For assaulting Eddie Howe

Anyone else think a 3 month jail sentence looks extremely harsh?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/23877431/man-jailed-attack-eddie-howe-leeds-newcastle/

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

No. He's ran on and assaulted Eddie Howe in his place of work. That would be unacceptable in any other workplace. He had a choice at the end of the day. He didn't have to do it. Nobody made him. I go to the football and its very easy not to do it.

[Hibbyradge]

For assaulting Eddie Howe

Anyone else think a 3 month jail sentence looks extremely harsh?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/23877431/man-jailed-attack-eddie-howe-leeds-newcastle/

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

It wasn't much of an "assault", but the court probably decided to make an example of him to deter others.

I imagine his solicitors will be appealing the sentence and if they get it commuted, we won't hear about it.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Opting not to click thru on the S*n so don’t know the circumstances but if folks go out their way to enter the field of play and get into an altercation that’s firmly on them. If some folks can’t behave then they should consider things or stay away from the footie (and any vices) if it makes them that way.

otherwise there comes a tipping point when it is seen as excusable / a new norm.

[JimBHibees]

Ridiculously harsh imo. He was stupid but come on nothing near an assault. Seemed like he was assaulted by the stewards more than Eddie was.

[Paul1642]

No. He's ran on and assaulted Eddie Howe in his place of work. That would be unacceptable in any other workplace. He had a choice at the end of the day. He didn't have to do it. Nobody made him. I go to the football and its very easy not to do it.

Not even close to compatible. Give a cop, a paramedic, a shop security guard or anyone of similar social standing a wee shove and you’d be guaranteed to get away with an admonishment or a small fine. Not condoning his actions, just the blatant inconsistency in our courts. Basically if something makes the media then your sentence will be harsher. I can say with 100% certainty that he wouldn’t have been jailed if he pushed me at my place of work.

The only justification I could think of for this sentence is if he’s got a heap of previous convictions or was on bail for a serious offence at the time.

[SChibs]

He'll be out in 6 weeks but still a ridiculous punishment. If every shove got a 12 week sentence the prisons would be an overflowing merry go round

[Shaggy]

I am pretty fkt off with the state of the country, with the constant behaviour laws, however...

In a football crowd where it is monkey see... monkey do
If the teet is allowed to get off lightly,
a game of football could end in proper carnage with the numbers of people involved,

In short, fk him , hope its not a cosy B&B

[HarpOnHibee]

It hardly constitutes as assault. But I understand why this sentencing was a harsh as it was. It's supposed to set an example for others who may get the idea to run up to a manager or player and potentially try something worse. Harsh, but he only has himself to blame.

[gaz1875]

No. He's ran on and assaulted Eddie Howe in his place of work. That would be unacceptable in any other workplace. He had a choice at the end of the day. He didn't have to do it. Nobody made him. I go to the football and its very easy not to do it.

Agree :top marks

[Pretty Boy]

No sympathy for him at all.

The sentence is inconsistent but I'm off the view that assaulting someone in their place of work, be they a nurse, bus driver, barman or football manager, should carry a punishment at the very top end of the guidelines.

I'm happy enough for the softly, softly approach to rehabilitation in most instances but this is a man in his 30s who has tried to attack someone in their place of work over a game of football. **** him, a few weeks in a Windsor group hotel might do him some good. If he walked away with a fine it just emboldens the next moron who could do something a hell of a lot worse.

[Lancs Harp]

Agree with PB

Not forgetting though we virtually massacred the rangers team in 2016.

[Scouse Hibee]

He'll be out in 6 weeks but still a ridiculous punishment. If every shove got a 12 week sentence the prisons would be an overflowing merry go round

Not ridiculous at all in my mind, needed an example set for folk who think attending a football match carries a different set of rules to normal society regarding acceptable behaviour. Just a pity it isn’t applied to more knuckle dragging supporters in the Scottish game.

[hibee-boys]

Not condoning his actions at all but if we lock up every person who commits ‘assaults’ of this nature we’d better start building more jails……and quick! Another example of football fans being treated differently to the rest of the population.

[Donegal Hibby]

He'll be out in 6 weeks but still a ridiculous punishment. If every shove got a 12 week sentence the prisons would be an overflowing merry go round

Punishment was far from ridiculous in what must have been a frightening experience for the Newcastle United manager. No pity for the offender whatsoever. Hopefully it will act as a deterrent in hooligan behaviour in the future.

[Scouse Hibee]

Not condoning his actions at all but if we lock up every person who commits ‘assaults’ of this nature we’d better start building more jails……and quick! Another example of football fans being treated differently to the rest of the population.

It’s more a case of football fans thinking they can do what they like once inside a ground in my opinion.

[0762]

No sympathy for him at all.

The sentence is inconsistent but I'm off the view that assaulting someone in their place of work, be they a nurse, bus driver, barman or football manager, should carry a punishment at the very top end of the guidelines.

I'm happy enough for the softly, softly approach to rehabilitation in most instances but this is a man in his 30s who has tried to attack someone in their place of work over a game of football. **** him, a few weeks in a Windsor group hotel might do him some good. If he walked away with a fine it just emboldens the next moron who could do something a hell of a lot worse.

Agreed. Zero sympathy for this guy or anyone else who finds themselves behind bars for similar behaviour.

[Just Alf]

Yup

With regards to it being harsh, it wasn't just a case of a couple of guys standing at a pub door etc, he's had to actively go out his way to be there.

[SChibs]

Not ridiculous at all in my mind, needed an example set for folk who think attending a football match carries a different set of rules to normal society regarding acceptable behaviour. Just a pity it isn’t applied to more knuckle dragging supporters in the Scottish game.

It looks like it IS held to different rules than normal society as you would never get 12 weeks jail time for just pushing someone in the street. I get people saying it could have been much worse but it wasn't, so the punishment should fit the crime.

[Kato]

Agree with PB

Not forgetting though we virtually massacred the rangers team in 2016.They all ended up in hospital too.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Dashing Bob S]

Agree with PB

Not forgetting though we virtually massacred the rangers team in 2016.

Still hanging my head in shame over my part in that appalling massacre of innocents. Even though I remained in the stands, I feel it reflected on me as a Hibernian supporter. In fact i've needed constant counselling and therapy since that dreadful day that absolutely ruined the cup final victory for me. :fibber:

[Scouse Hibee]

It looks like it IS held to different rules than normal society as you would never get 12 weeks jail time for just pushing someone in the street. I get people saying it could have been much worse but it wasn't, so the punishment should fit the crime.

Of course you could. It depends who it was you pushed and the circumstances.

[BS44]

It's a similar punishment that the Birmingham fan got for attacking Grealish. He only served 4 weeks of a 14 week sentence

[SChibs]

Of course you could. It depends who it was you pushed and the circumstances.

Why does it depend WHO you pushed if everyone is an equal human being?

[Hibbyradge]

Why does it depend WHO you pushed if everyone is an equal human being?

What if they assaulted a disabled person?

What about a 4 year old child? Or a 90 year old?

I doubt many people would equate those types of assaults with similar on an able bodied grown adult.

While it's not exactly the same, running on to a football pitch and assaulting one of the innocent people doing their job, is worse than doing the same to someone you might be arguing with in the street.

[SChibs]

What if they assaulted a disabled person?

What about a 4 year old child? Or a 90 year old?

I doubt many people would equate those types of assaults with similar on an able bodied grown adult.

While it's not exactly the same, running on to a football pitch and assaulting one of the innocent people doing their job, is worse than doing the same to someone you might be arguing with in the street.

Why is it worse? do you think if I pushed a mcdonalds employee I'd get 12 weeks in jail? Probably not. If 12 weeks is a consistent sentence I'm all for it but its clearly not.

When people are getting community service and suspended sentences for sexual assault I can't agree a push warrants 12 weeks in jail

[Silky]

Why is it worse? do you think if I pushed a mcdonalds employee I'd get 12 weeks in jail? Probably not. If 12 weeks is a consistent sentence I'm all for it but its clearly not.

When people are getting community service and suspended sentences for sexual assault I can't agree a push warrants 12 weeks in jail

It's not just a push though, is it? He's also invaded the pitch, an illegal act under The Football Offences Act 1991. That and the push are at least two Offences. It's not illegal for Joe Public to be in a McDonalds. It is for them to run on to a football pitch.

[SChibs]

It's not just a push though, is it? He's also invaded the pitch, an illegal act under The Football Offences Act 1991. That and the push are at least two Offences. It's not illegal for Joe Public to be in a McDonalds. It is for them to run on to a football pitch.

I'll reiterate. When people are getting suspended sentences for sexual assault how can they justify a custodial sentence for invading a pitch and a push?

[Since90+2]

It's not just a push though, is it? He's also invaded the pitch, an illegal act under The Football Offences Act 1991. That and the push are at least two Offences. It's not illegal for Joe Public to be in a McDonalds. It is for them to run on to a football pitch.

Invaded a football pitch is probably literally the least harmful criminal act I can think of. You are literally breaking the law by simply running into a grass field with people on it.

[Since90+2]

I'll reiterate. When people are getting suspended sentences for sexual assault how can they justify a custodial sentence for invading a pitch and a push?

Exactly. They can't.

[Eyrie]

I'll reiterate. When people are getting suspended sentences for sexual assault how can they justify a custodial sentence for invading a pitch and a push?

You're asking the wrong question.

The correct question is why are people only getting suspended sentences for sexual assault?

[SChibs]

You're asking the wrong question.

The correct question is why are people only getting suspended sentences for sexual assault?

I agree that such crimes should come with harsher punishment but they have set a precedent by not treating them as harshly and we get this situation where there is such an inconsistency

[Hibbyradge]

Why is it worse? do you think if I pushed a mcdonalds employee I'd get 12 weeks in jail? Probably not. If 12 weeks is a consistent sentence I'm all for it but its clearly not.

When people are getting community service and suspended sentences for sexual assault I can't agree a push warrants 12 weeks in jail

I think if you assaulted a Macdonald's worker, or a bus driver, or a nurse , you should expect a more severe punishment than if you assaulted some bloke in the pub you fell out with.

By the way, you ignored my questions about people who are disabled, children and the aged.

[SChibs]

I think if you assaulted a Macdonald's worker, or a bus driver, or a nurse , you should expect a more severe punishment than if you assaulted some bloke in the pub you fell out with.

By the way, you ignored my questions about people who are disabled, children and the aged.

Because Eddie Howe is none of the examples you provided so how does it apply to this discussion? If someone pushed me at my work I can almost guarantee the culprit wouldn't be given a custodial sentence.


Why would the punishment be different if the push was in a pub vs in mcdonalds?

[Hibbyradge]

Because Eddie Howe is none of the examples you provided so how does it apply to this discussion? If someone pushed me at my work I can almost guarantee the culprit wouldn't be given a custodial sentence.


Why would the punishment be different if the push was in a pub vs in mcdonalds?

You mentioned the Madonalds worker.

I can't help you if you don't understand that under different circumstances, similar offences might be deemed more serious.

You've still ignored my questions about a disabled person, a child and an aged individual. You can now add a nurse and a bus driver to that list.

I wonder why you've chosen to ignore them. :hmmm:

[Mibbes Aye]

A few people on this thread suggesting it wasnt an assault, or putting the word in inverted commas.

In English and Scots law, it easily counts as common assault, with no apparent defence. You don't have to physically lay hands on someone to commit assault.

The fact that he appears to have been voluntarily intoxicated, and the degree of culpability (he had to make an effort tto get over to Howe) would be seen as aggravating factors.

Sentencing guidelines for common assault in England are up to six months, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors. He got three.

If anything I suspect he was lucky and the three months was a pragmatic decision - and he also entered a guilty plea, which helped a little. There are huge pressures on prison numbers so any custodial sentence will be imposed with that in mind.

[Scouse Hibee]

Why does it depend WHO you pushed if everyone is an equal human being?

I think you’re deliberately being awkward, you know exactly what I mean, I ‘m not going to post various scenarios for you.

[Hibbyradge]

A few people on this thread suggesting it wasnt an assault, or putting the word in inverted commas.

In English and Scots law, it easily counts as common assault, with no apparent defence. You don't have to physically lay hands on someone to commit assault.

The fact that he appears to have been voluntarily intoxicated, and the degree of culpability (he had to make an effort tto get over to Howe) would be seen as aggravating factors.

Sentencing guidelines for common assault in England are up to six months, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors. He got three.

If anything I suspect he was lucky and the three months was a pragmatic decision - and he also entered a guilty plea, which helped a little. There are huge pressures on prison numbers so any custodial sentence will be imposed with that in mind.

"Your honour, I was involuntarily pished out of my head."

[Since90+2]

A few people on this thread suggesting it wasnt an assault, or putting the word in inverted commas.

In English and Scots law, it easily counts as common assault, with no apparent defence. You don't have to physically lay hands on someone to commit assault.

The fact that he appears to have been voluntarily intoxicated, and the degree of culpability (he had to make an effort tto get over to Howe) would be seen as aggravating factors.

Sentencing guidelines for common assault in England are up to six months, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors. He got three.

If anything I suspect he was lucky and the three months was a pragmatic decision - and he also entered a guilty plea, which helped a little. There are huge pressures on prison numbers so any custodial sentence will be imposed with that in mind.

Being under the influence would absolutely not be seen as an aggravating factor.

[CockneyRebel]

You're asking the wrong question.

The correct question is why are people only getting suspended sentences for sexual assault?


:aok:

[Hibbyradge]

Being under the influence would absolutely not be seen as an aggravating factor.

Not true.

[SChibs]

You mentioned the Madonalds worker.

I can't help you if you don't understand that under different circumstances, similar offences might be deemed more serious.

You've still ignored my questions about a disabled person, a child and an aged individual. You can now add a nurse and a bus driver to that list.

I wonder why you've chosen to ignore them. :hmmm:

I answered your question in the post you quoted

[Hibbyradge]

Why does it depend WHO you pushed if everyone is an equal human being?

So you understand the answer to this question now?

[Mibbes Aye]

Being under the influence would absolutely not be seen as an aggravating factor.

You should tell the Sentencing Council.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/overarching-guides/crown-court/item/general-guideline-overarching-principles/#Step%202%20Aggravating%20and%20mitigating%20facto rs

[Since90+2]

You should tell the Sentencing Council.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/overarching-guides/crown-court/item/general-guideline-overarching-principles/#Step%202%20Aggravating%20and%20mitigating%20facto rs

Wrong.

You've just copy and paste something without even reading it yourself.

Literally from the link you have sent:

"The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending.

In the case of a person addicted to drugs or alcohol the intoxication may be considered not to be voluntary, but the court should have regard to the extent to which the offender has sought help or engaged with any assistance which has been offered or made available in dealing with the addiction.

An offender who has voluntarily consumed drugs and/or alcohol must accept the consequences of the behaviour that results, even if it is out of character."

Being under the influence does not, in the majority of cases, lead to lighter sentencing as an aggravating factor.

Perhaps read your own links first next time.

[Since90+2]

Not true.

See above.

[Mibbes Aye]

Wrong.

You've just copy and paste something without even reading it yourself.

Literally from the link you have sent:

"The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending.

In the case of a person addicted to drugs or alcohol the intoxication may be considered not to be voluntary, but the court should have regard to the extent to which the offender has sought help or engaged with any assistance which has been offered or made available in dealing with the addiction.

An offender who has voluntarily consumed drugs and/or alcohol must accept the consequences of the behaviour that results, even if it is out of character."

Being under the influence does not, in the majority of cases, lead to lighter sentencing as an aggravating factor.

Perhaps read your own links first next time.

Quite the hostile tone there. I shared a link, no copy and pasting, and had read the contents. I had a rough idea what they said prior to finding the link but as you were throwing words like ‘absolutely ‘ around, I thought I would let the Sentencing Council guidelines do the heavy lifting.

The funny thing is I’m struggling to see how what you have quoted backs up your point!

[Hibbyradge]

See above.

You said "Being under the influence would absolutely not be seen as an aggravating factor."

That's clearly not true.

[Caversham Green]

Wrong.

You've just copy and paste something without even reading it yourself.

Literally from the link you have sent:

"The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending.

In the case of a person addicted to drugs or alcohol the intoxication may be considered not to be voluntary, but the court should have regard to the extent to which the offender has sought help or engaged with any assistance which has been offered or made available in dealing with the addiction.

An offender who has voluntarily consumed drugs and/or alcohol must accept the consequences of the behaviour that results, even if it is out of character."

Being under the influence does not, in the majority of cases, lead to lighter sentencing as an aggravating factor.

Perhaps read your own links first next time.

I think you've misinterpreted Mibbes Aye's point about aggravating factor. As I read his post 'aggravating' and 'mitigating' are opposites - i.e. a mitigating factor might reduce the sentence but an aggravating factor would, if anything increase it.

[Just Alf]

I think you've misinterpreted Mibbes Aye's point about aggravating factor. As I read his post 'aggravating' and 'mitigating' are opposites - i.e. a mitigating factor might reduce the sentence but an aggravating factor would, if anything increase it.That's how I'm reading it as well.

Take the McDonald's example.

Someone's had a crappy meal in the restaurant and stands arguing then pushes the manager is different to someone going out their way to drive back after a delivery and seeking out said manager to have an altercation.

(I've been close to that 2nd one once or twice! :rofl: )

[RyeSloan]

I think you've misinterpreted Mibbes Aye's point about aggravating factor. As I read his post 'aggravating' and 'mitigating' are opposites - i.e. a mitigating factor might reduce the sentence but an aggravating factor would, if anything increase it.

What?

You mean like ‘The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending’?

If only we had some source that made that fact clear we wouldn’t need to argue about it…

[lyonhibs]

You're asking the wrong question.

The correct question is why are people only getting suspended sentences for sexual assault?

Exactly.

That our criminal justice system regularly drops the ball in the sphere of the mentioned type of crime doesn't mean that nobody else committing any other sort of crime should get off scot free.

Delighted the stupid idiot got a bit of jail time. Might persuade any future "have a go heros" to stay in their seats.

[lyonhibs]

Quite the hostile tone there. I shared a link, no copy and pasting, and had read the contents. I had a rough idea what they said prior to finding the link but as you were throwing words like ‘absolutely ‘ around, I thought I would let the Sentencing Council guidelines do the heavy lifting.

The funny thing is I’m struggling to see how what you have quoted backs up your point!

:agree::agree::faf:

Someone doesn't know what aggravating means in these circumstances, and it's not you :greengrin

[I'm Spartacus]

The additional key part here is he's done it before and been given a football banning order, fire him off to the jail for a wee stint.

[Pretty Boy]

The additional key part here is he's done it before and been given a football banning order, fire him off to the jail for a wee stint.

I think that's the key point. Magistrates and Sheriffs will try very hard not to send people to prison. There's no way he is getting jail time for a first offence. I'd wager he's heard the words 'last chance' at least once before in a court room before walking away with community service or a suspended sentence.