Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To feel sorry for (and think the punishment is too long) for the 18 year old who threw the fire extinguisher in the protests

608 replies

LaurieFairyonthetreeEatsCake · 11/01/2011 13:56

2 years, 8 months in jail Shock

here

That's a looooong time. Is the reasoning supposed to be that it's a deterrent?

There are people with asbo's who cause no end of trouble and don't get sentences like this.

OP posts:
KalokiMallow · 11/01/2011 18:23

The "but he didn't hurt anyone" brigade haven't yet explained what they thought he was attempting to do when he threw the fire extinguisher into the crowd, other than trying to harm people. Hmm

witches · 11/01/2011 18:24

Hooligan. People do have the right to protest about thier views. However, when those protests end in violence ( which lets be honest is often due to an unfotunate minority) you must accept the consequence for your actions.

toeragsnotriches · 11/01/2011 18:24

YABVU. He's 18. He could easily have killed someone. If he's old enough to protest he's old enough to take responsibility for his actions.

thebody · 11/01/2011 18:27

its a hard one because I have kids that age and they protested as well..

part of me does feel sorry for him of course just because hes 18.. I just do!!

but of course he could have killed someone.. he could have killed another innocent student of the same age let alone a police officer..

however i agree with some of the posters that careless and drunk drivers who actually DO kill seem to get less or no time in prison..thats wrong..

hes got a stiff sentence as a deterrent and because it was aimed at police officers.. he probably wont serve anything like that though

ledkr · 11/01/2011 18:27

at least he wont need his student loan now. Grin He will be debt free.

CaveMum · 11/01/2011 18:27

So, he's smart enough to get 10 GCSEs but not smart enough to realise that throwing things of buildings might hurt someone Hmm

ledkr · 11/01/2011 18:32

"He couldnt have killed an innocent student never mind a police officer"

Oh yes that would have been far worse wouldnt it?DH is a policeman and has ds,s the same age as the innocent students and i am about to give birth,i dont think id have been particularly soothed by that fact if he had been killed by a fire exstinnguisher.

HelenBa · 11/01/2011 18:36

I don't think that the sentence is just based on what 'could have happened' but on intention.

thebody · 11/01/2011 19:03

sorry Ledkr you totally misunderstood my post.. I meant that he could have killed anyone..

i meant no disrespect to police officers who had an extremely difficult situation to deal with and who showed restraint imo..

for what its worth my own dss who were on the demo feel like he deserved the sentence and hes a prat!!! they also felt the police were professional on that day and have no complaints..

ledkr · 11/01/2011 19:07

sorry *the body" i didnt mean to sound aggressive im not one of those mn's.
I used to be a hunt sab yrs ago and so my opinion of the police wasnt great but dh is one of the good ones so i feel protective when people attack them but equally pd off when i hear of the many cases of police brutality so its nice your boys said that.What is their opinion of it all?

alicatte · 11/01/2011 19:17

What was he convicted of exactly?

Violent Affray? Attempted Murder?

I've only just come home - the first couple of school days are always full of meetings so I'm not too sure what has gone on here. If he is 18 is he a first year student?

In the normal way - unless it is attempted murder, arson or some such - I presume he must have some previous conviction to have actually been jailed.

noddyholder · 11/01/2011 19:25

No previous conviction at all

thebrownstuff · 11/01/2011 19:29

The sentence is not unfair in itself, it just seems totally ridiculous relative to what offenders who have committed far worse crimes are given. Offenders who not only had intent, but actually harmed.

SarfEasticated · 11/01/2011 19:30

I really feel for his poor mother ...she must be really suffering now.

FellatioNelson · 11/01/2011 19:31

Haven't read the thread yet but: I have very mixed feelings about this. My first gut reacion was that the sentence was too harsh. I know he could have killed someone, but he didn't even injure anyone in the event.

He would appear to be a decent lad, with a promising future ahead of him, no previous, who acted very stupidly in the heat of the moment, and got carried away with the adrenaline rush of the occasion. He didn't think about the consequences of his actions, at least I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that.

Then I ask myself how is he different from thuggish lads on the street who mug and knife people and start fights for fun, glass or bottle people, who don't necessarily intend to kill, but relish the glory of being the big hard man and hurting others for the rush. I detest those people. With a passion. I detest needless violence of any sort.

I also think we have a right to peaceful demonstration which is the envy of much of the rest of the world and it is a shame that some take advantage and spoil it for the majority. But he is a kid. And no-ne was hurt, no matter how utterly stupid his actions.

I still can't make my mind up about the sentence but I feel very sad about the whole thing. I really feel for his poor mother tonight. My son is 18 and in 6th form too. Sad

Whitethorn · 11/01/2011 19:34

He threw a fire extinguisher. Is that the kind of behaviour that should be rewarded.

Yes possibly the sentance is harsh as they want it to act as a deterrent, however harsh sentances are given to kids carrying and using knives and guns (even when they dont kill or hurt someone, just intend to)

However they are not middle class yobs so no one on Mumsnet feels the need to defend them!!

specialknickers · 11/01/2011 19:38

YANBU! Seriously, I could weep for this boy. He'd just turned 18 and he got carried away and did something really REALLY stupid. Who can't relate to that? Most of our actions at this age are impulsive and daft, and his were no different. Of course he should be punished severely, but this?

What kind of a sentence do you think he would have got for throwing a fire extinguisher across a bar on a night out? If it hadn't actually hurt anyone? 6 months suspended tops.

This government is making a scapegoat out of a teenager who handed himself in, and a monkey out of his mum who told him to do so.

alicatte · 11/01/2011 19:38

Crikey

Obviously he did do something very stupid and should have expected some comeback I've just seen on the news that he's an A level student, an adult child then really - it seems severe. Was it some sort of 'example' sentence in which case he would, presumably, be able to appeal on the basis that it was 'cruel' (because he's about to take his A levels) and 'unusual' (because it was an 'example').

I don't want to seem 'middle class' about this but - is it really the same as an ASBO or a young person habitually hanging around drinking and fighting? Is he really a danger to society?

I thought the average sentence for that sort of thing was 18 months (which would mean 9 months max really) or a fine.

He absolutely needs to pay his debt to society though. I feel very sorry for his mother and his family.

TheMeow · 11/01/2011 19:39

YABU hopefully it'll teach him what his parents obviously never did - don't be an idiot and throw dangerous objects at people.

goingmadinthecountry · 11/01/2011 19:39

He deserved it. Not only could he have killed someone, he as well as a few others damaged what could have been a hugely effective protest. University is wasted on the stupid. Protest is one thing, mindless violence and destruction is always pointless and totally unacceptable. Feeling among dd (17) and her soon to be fellow university students is that people like this give all students a bad name. He's an adult, he messed up, tough. My 15 yo is well enough aware of the world out there to know that even dodgy facebook photos do you no good. It was yob behaviour. And yes, I protested in the 80s, and despite heing left of centre had the same view at the time.

theywillgrowup · 11/01/2011 19:40

yanbu

was thinking similar myself

thebrownstuff · 11/01/2011 19:41

Not surprised to see the "middle classes" being flogged in here as usual, blah blah blah, so predictable.

Fact is, he hd no previous, acted stupidly/rashly, has a bright future ahead of him, generally a good lad. Even though no harm came to anyone, I understand that he had to be punished, but I do empathise greatly.

TandB · 11/01/2011 19:43

One of the issues about sentencing for violent disorder is that the judge has to take into consideration the conduct of the whole group involved in the disorder. So he was sentenced based on his own actions and the actions of those around him. The reasoning is that if you involve yourself in a situation where there is criminal activity going on, you have a duty to remove yourself. If you choose to continue the conduct then you are acting as part of the group.

To the people saying this is a political sentence and the judge would have been hand-picked, you really are giving way too much credit to the criminal justice system as a political entity. The sentence is, as I said earlier, within the guidelines, albeit on the heavier side. He has almost certainly just fallen foul of one of the tougher sentencing judges.

If I had been representing him, I would have been disappointed with the sentence and I might, possibly, consider an appeal, but that would very much depend on the remarks of the sentencing judge. On the face of it I am not sure it could be said to be manifestly excessive which is what it comes down to.

slhilly · 11/01/2011 19:44

Hum.

Kaloki asks what he might have intended doing other than causing people harm. No-one can know for sure, but my guess is that he wanted to set the fire extinguisher off by throwing it off the building, thus getting it to spray everyone. I think stupidity rather than active malice (ie intent to do harm) is a likely explanation.

Similarly, I think stupidity with only a small amount of malice lies behind the action of the police officer who pushed over Ian Tomlinson and killed him and was punished for this actual harm with ... no punishment at all. I doubt the police officer wanted to cause serious harm, but I struggle to imagine he didn't want Ian Tomlinson to be sore and bruised.

There are times when "Justice? Just us" feels all too appropriate to me.

Expat, btw, you tell the heart-warming story of the man who killed his girlfriend by drunk-driving at 120mph and then reformed. You mention that he served 3 years for his crime ie 4months longer than this man's sentence, and 1yr8months longer than he's likely to actually serve. Do you think that differential is appropriate? If not, what would you change increase the sentence for your drunk-driving involuntary killer, decrease the sentence on the fire extinguisher tosser (I'm quite pleased with that pun), or both?

One other comment: there seem to be a lot of people making extraodinarily vitriolic comments about this man. In particular, a lot of suggestions that he should suffer for the rest of his life only be able to get dead-end jobs, etc etc. These comments frankly sound a lot like vengeance, sadism and mob rule not a desire to see the rule of law prevail. Will someone justify them? What is the value of such hate-filled speech?

winnybella · 11/01/2011 19:44

Not sure about the bright future, tbh.

You have to be really fucking stupid to do what he did.

It's a miracle no one was killed. It was NOT just a prank.

He bloody well deserves 16 mo in YOI.