Fire extinguisher throwing student jailed.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Teddy Novaks:
"A student who admitted throwing a fire extinguisher from the roof of a central London building during the student fees protests has been jailed.

Edward Woollard, 18, from Hampshire, was among protesters who broke into the Tory party headquarters and emerged on the roof on 10 November.

He was jailed for two years and eight months after admitting at an earlier hearing to committing violent disorder"

cannot think much more than "good".
Clicketty

Indeed.

thing is that today ypou seem to get less time for rape and murder

quote:

He was jailed for two years and eight months after admitting at an earlier hearing to committing violent disorder"

quote:

thing is that today you seem to get less time for rape and murder

I blame the pixies at the bottom of the garden.

quote:

Originally posted by backfromoz:
thing is that today ypou seem to get less time for rape and murder

you can only get life for murder and someone received two life sentences for two rapes today so lets not lose our objectivity here.

Just as well he didn't run someone over on a pedestrian crossing or suchlike he might have got a fine or suspended sentence.

Seems a bit excessive when granny beaters get 6 months community work.

Obviously a harsh sentence to deter the rising swell of student rioters.

quote:

Originally posted by Redmires:
Obviously a harsh sentence to deter the rising swell of student rioters.

More likely a harsh sentence to deter stupid twunts throwing fire extinguishers off high rise buildings into a mass of rioting people and police below.

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
More likely a harsh sentence to deter stupid twunts throwing fire extinguishers off high rise buildings into a mass of rioting people and police below.

Agreed. He could have seriously injured someone.

Bloody hell I can't believe people are trying to play this down. If it had hit somebody it would have killed them. If it had exploded it could have seriously injured several people. Apparently it was empty but did he know that? He threw a potential bomb from the top of a building. He's a stupid malicious idiot who deserves everything he got and more.

I think he go off lightly and thanks to his mother for persuading him to confess. I'm sure that helped his case.

He deserves everything he got and more. I can't believe people are trying to play it down. He could could have killed somebody or injured a few people. Did he know it was empty when he threw it? I suspect not. He threw what could have been a bomb from the top of a building on to a crowd of people. If it had hit somebody it would have killed them.

No it's not a misguided piece of youthful idealism. Why is it not attempted murder?

If it had landed on your son's or daughter's head you wouldn't think the sentence was to harsh, mind you he would have gone down for a lot longer if it had. A stupid act of mindless vandalism that could have killed someone, I would say he got away lightly.
Dave

quote:

Why is it not attempted murder?

Why is it not attempted murder?

it would have to be proved that he intended to kill someone. He only has to stick to the defence of I just wan't to cause mayhem and a jury would likely acquit him. Fortunately for us, wanting to cause mayhem by throwing an extinguisher off a roof fits the crime of violent disorder very nicely.

I think the sentence was too harsh.

From what I hear, he’s a young shy lad who’s never been in trouble before.
He gave himself up.
He is truly very sorry he done it. (Probably extremely frightened too)

All he needed was a fine and a suspended sentence. Prison for him is far too harsh, that is a hell place to be for young lad like him, he should have had a second chance.
Lucky no one got hurt, and be different if they did, but the sentence he got has messed his whole life up now, no second chance because a wealthy Tory voting judge made an example of him using very rough political justice.

All part of the gloomy future with the Tory game plan, criminalize the poor, and keep rewarding the bankers with millions.

We're all in this together

Debs

quote:

you can only get life for murder and someone received two life sentences for two rapes today so lets not lose our objectivity here.

and in that case he is eligible for parole in 7 years, ergo 1 life sentence is worth 3.5 years.

and this kid, who actually didn't harm anyone let us remember, gets near that?

i agree with Debs largely. and if prison was needed a 6 months max would do the job of deterring him and others i'd have thought.

I agree on the sentence. 3 - 6 months enough IMHO when you walk into the pol. stn. with your mum and nobody hurt.
Didn't research the judge so no idea whether he's wealthy and/or a Tory, Debs. Presumably you know that s/he is (?)

By convention, judges do not enter the political area - so the answer is no, we do not know what the judge votes, or indeed if he is "wealthy", whatever that is supposed to mean.

Had a comment been made about a "poor Labour-voting..." in circumstances where the author had no idea whether or not either part of that statement were true, it would no doubt have been jumped upon as being a snide, blinkered and ignorant comment. Quite rightly so as well.

For what it's worth, much of what is known about the boy in question would also suggest that he hardly came from an impoverished background. Assuming that's true for the moment, does that have anything to do with the merits or otherwise of the case? I can't see that it does, which makes the judges political and financial position equally irrelevant to my way of thinking.

Surely it's perfectly possible to debate the sentence without the argument descending to comment upon these frankly pathetic asides.

quote:

Originally posted by naim_nymph:
From what I hear, he’s a young shy lad who’s never been in trouble before.
He gave himself up.
He is truly very sorry he done it. (Probably extremely frightened too)

All he needed was a fine and a suspended sentence. Prison for him is far too harsh, that is a hell place to be for young lad like him, he should have had a second chance.
Lucky no one got hurt, and be different if they did, but the sentence he got has messed his whole life up now, no second chance because a wealthy Tory voting judge made an example of him using very rough political justice.

All part of the gloomy future with the Tory game plan, criminalize the poor, and keep rewarding the bankers with millions.

We're all in this together

Debs

Debs,

Don't forget the Conservatives, sorry, Tories, want to kill every firstborn and use the meat to make sausages for school dinners. Labour are the party of the poor.

---

As to the sentence, it isn't that this one is too harsh, it is that the others mentioned are too lenient.

Cheers,
OW

People need to get realistic over this
It might have been a moment of madness & a rush of blood in the heat of the moment, & I guess most all of us have been in that situation - albeit in less controversial situations
But he deliberately threw that metal fire extinguisher off a high multi-story roof at the crowd below, therefore it was with intent in the eyes of the law
He was with a group of others looking down on the crowd & they all knew that crowd included policemen, therefore the charge should have included one or other of the various assault of a constable.

If it hit someone - which it almost did, missing by aprx 1 or 2 metres - it would have grievously injured or caused death.
The crime therefore is Attempting to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent

The fact that it was aimed at the police carries an additional tariff & in my view he was lucky to get away with 2 years.
Their but for the grace etc he might have been facing manslaughter