Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Boy who threw fire extinguisher during student protests jailed

112 replies

bobthebuddha · 11/01/2011 14:30

For 2 years and 8 months. Not condoning his actions in any way, but having read what his mother had to say I find myself feeling for her and him. Not a popular position I daresay.

If I'd been in her position I freely confess would have actively discouraged my son to hand himself in knowing that a) no-one had been hurt, dangerous as his action was b) he would be likely to be 'made an example of' (in the week that a man found guilty of severely beating a 2 year old walked free from court) and c) his life would indeed be 'ruined'. I hope I never find myself in that position once DS reaches 18...

OP posts:
Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:43

2shoes - I would say the same about a football fan if he had just come to enjoy the match. However, if he had intended to get into a fight or he had been drinking, it would be another matter.

Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:46

Kaloki, yes there's a big difference. You don't just happen to have a gun in your hand. The fire extinguisher wasn't aimed. It was thrown, dropped. If he had intended to hurt anyone, he would have thrown stones or whatever.

KalokiMallow · 12/01/2011 22:47

So throwing stones would have been intentional, but throwing a heavier object wasn't? Hmm

KalokiMallow · 12/01/2011 22:49

Also you don't "just happen" to be holding a fire extinguisher, you make a conscious decision to pick it up, and a further conscious decision to throw it off a roof.

Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:49

YES, Kaloki. Coming prepared for a fight. Geddit?

Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:50

Conscious decision? Don't think anyone was making conscious decisions.

KalokiMallow · 12/01/2011 22:51

Is there a specific period before an act which is needed to make something intentional?

Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:51

Mind you - what was a fire extinguisher doing on the roof??

My head hurts. Off to bed. Smile

woollyideas · 12/01/2011 22:51

I agree, he was just being a very silly boy. Dangerously silly. But I don't think there was intent.

KalokiMallow · 12/01/2011 22:52

So he unconsciously picked up the fire extinguisher, and unconsciously lobbed it off the roof? Was he hypnotised/sleep protesting? Hmm

expatinscotland · 12/01/2011 22:53

Let's recap here.

  1. he was on the roof of a building he was not invited into as a guest or there as a visitor.

  2. he or someone else pulled a fire extinguisher off a wall, either there or somewhere else.

  3. he is on camera first spraying the extinguisher from the top of the building.

  4. he is then on camera holding the canister off the edge of the building and swinging it to and fro.

  5. he is next on camera releasing the canister, and this camera follows the trajectory of the extinguisher as it hurtles to the ground.

  6. when the camera pans back up, it appears he has disappeared from the edge of the building/camera frame.

Now I was not in the court, but from the footage it might be possible to conclude he thought about/contemplated his action before he released the canister into the crowd.

GiddyPickle · 12/01/2011 22:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hammerlikedaisies · 12/01/2011 22:54

Cross-posted. Dunno - the whole conscious decision thing is a mystery to me. How many of our decisions in life are conscious? To be fully conscious of all the possible effects and consequences of one's actions? Never happened to me ...

Must go to bed. Night.

KalokiMallow · 12/01/2011 22:56

"Mind you - what was a fire extinguisher doing on the roof??"

Oh I don't know, maybe it had been taken up in order to throw it at the crowd below Hmm

GiddyPickle · 12/01/2011 22:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

expatinscotland · 12/01/2011 23:05

Perhaps it might have been up there in case there was, I don't know, a fire?

Or maybe it was ripped off a wall in the building, which would have them in there because of a little thing called Health and Safety policy.

lusamjo · 13/01/2011 04:39

There but for the Grace of God, as a mum of three young men I know that just turning 18 doesn't make a boy a man. This is just a boy who got caught up in the excitement of the day, showing off, proving himself in front of his peers. Did anyone hear him shout anything like "Watch me kill a policeman with this"? No, because that wasn't his intent. It was just showing off, remember he didn't hit anyone,noone got hurt, at most he should have got community service, maybe even as a community policeman to see how hard it is to be on the Force today, a suspended sentence, but two years plus is harsh. Is anyone else surprised at the haste in which this came to court, tried and convicted in less than 3m months? They are just making an example of him, a scapegoat. What good comes of him being locked up? He threw a fire extinguisher, not a grenade, noone got hurt by it, he was been convicted for what might have been. Thus everyone who has a drink and drives home without an accident should be in gaol too, they could have hurt someone, the fact that they didn't is more luck than design as is the case here. That would be ridiculous though wouldn't it? The system would be really clogged. How can he be given a custodial sentence for just throwing a fire extinguisher? It makes a mockery of our courts, you can't send a lad to gaol for what might have happened, Can you? seems so, Shame on us. Free him Now.

GotArt · 13/01/2011 05:02

He knew the moment he picked up the extinguisher the consequences of his actions could be that he could have injured/killed someone seriously. You learn stupid facts like 'you can kill someone with a penny dropped off the Empire State Building' stuff as a kid. Ignorance of such an act or arguing you caught up in the energy of the crowd is bull. The courts should have given him a choice of going to jail or 2 years in the army. There seems to be a lot of that in Canada... maybe that's why our army sucks so much though. Can't he get out early on good behaviour or something of the like? Or do I just watch too much Law&Order.

expatinscotland · 13/01/2011 09:13

Do you read the thread, lus?! A soliticor has already been on to expound in great detail why this case came to court so quickly and how sentencing works in the English criminal justice system and why it is pointless to compare this sentence with other cases and why intent counts when it comes to sentencing.

No wonder so many people behave so immaturely and irresponsibly when we have people mollycoddling and infantising young people.

He is considered an adult by society. That is how it is.

And again, he tresspassed in a private building, had someone else's property in his hands, sprayed the extinguisher (ever inhaled that stuff?) on the crowd, swung it around over the edge whilst looking at it, then watched himself release it into a crowd of people.

This is a criminal act for very, very good reason. He is now a criminal for having done this.

An eejit one, too.

dotnet · 15/01/2011 12:03

Kaloki - just found this thread! I wish you could find a bit of charity in your heart for this boy. He is now in his third day in kids' prison - my God, how must he be feeling? And before anyone dives in with the 'you wouldn't be so bleeding heart if it was a working class boy in a hoodie' etc etc - just remember this boy had NEVER been in trouble before. He'd even chosen Religious Studies as one of his A Levels (you might think that has no significance whatsoever, but I think it does, a bit. It indicates he is a thinker and has an enquiring mind, at least.)
What Edward Woollard said about his big and stupid split second decision was that he finished the emptying of the fire extinguisher (squirting it down towards the police line, I'd guess) and then - he dropped it to the ground below. He doesn't claim it fell out of his hands, but as I said on another thread, he claims he dropped it into a space. And as it happened, into a space it fell.
Fingers crossed Edward Woollard will get through his long incarceration OK. I really hope he will be able to find a sort of niche like Stephen Fry did, helping people who want to improve their reading skills. He might be accepted and left alone by bullies that way.
Stephen Fry had the asset, though, of a giant personality and the ability to make people laugh, which could defuse tensions and antagonism.

I just hope Edward Woollard has the resources to cope in what I imagine might be a sometimes threatening and scary environment. Poor boy, the sentence is far, far too long a punishment for being very stupid - without any hurt at all having been caused.
Not nice to see someone set up as an example to frighten people.

moomimi · 16/01/2011 22:16

This has been playing on my mind. I have a teenage son slightly younger and could imagine him getting caught up in something like this and getting carried away. What Edward Woollard did was wrong but the sentance is horrific. He had no previous convictions and unlike other 'protestors' had not attempted to hide his identity on the day. The justice system seems very unfair in this country sometimes.

reallytired · 16/01/2011 22:35

Edward Woollard is a young offender which is why he will serve his sentence in a young offender's insitute. The law recongises that 18 year olds are pretty immature which is why he will be sent to a young offenders insitute.

I think he does deserve to be jailed, but a six month jail sentence would be more appropiate.

Deciduousblonde · 17/01/2011 00:44

3 years is way too harsh, IMO.

People have been found guilty of far worse and jailed for less time..if at all.

onlyjuststillme · 17/01/2011 01:01

Imagine he had got into a car (entered private property) and driven it full pelt into a crowd of people. By some kind of miracle no one was hurt. All luck no judgement.

Would you feel this sentence too harsh?

What is the difference in the two scenarios?

Deciduousblonde · 17/01/2011 01:06

My point is that there have been people getting into a car drunk and actually killing others, and they receive lesser sentences.

Just because he 'might' have killed someone, doesn't make the sentence fair. He didn't kill or maim anyone. That's the inconsistency.

Of course he was an idiot.