Friday, 20 July 2012

Well, DC Debbie Jones, I Wouldn't Be...

Case officer DC Debbie Jones said: “Stower displayed excessive violence against an innocent man that was purely doing his job.
“I am pleased with the result of this investigation.
“I hope Stower has time to reflect on the gravity of what he did and the lasting effect his actions will have on the victim and his family.”
He got eight months. Eight months! For attacking a bus driver with an axe!

And we know he won't serve it all, don't we?

19 comments:

MtAngry61 said...

Stower was found guilty of ABH

Cutting someone's throat sounds more like GBH to me

Terry Stower, aged 53, of Sparta Street, attacked the driver after he was asked to move his truck which was blocking the bus’ path through Plumstead.

Why no additional sentence for carrying an axe? Plumstead's hardly the 100 acre wood!

Anonymous said...

He would probably have been arrested for GBH (Grievious Bodily Harm) but no doubt the CPS accepted a guilty plea of ABH to be able to tick the boxes for successful prosecutions and remaining within budget. Criminal justice in this country stinks.
Plodnomore

Gnostic said...

Perhaps the WPC was impressed a prison sentence was actually handed out.

However, I agree with plodnomore. The tick-box culture monster has a voracious appetite and must be fed constantly. There is no criminal justice, there is only justice that is criminal.

Woman on a Raft said...

Well, the way juries have been going, there was a risk that he might be acquitted if they didn't get him to plead guilty to something.

But that's not ABH. It's an axe to the throat; how in the name of justice is that not an attempted murder? It's pure sophistry to argue that does not entail an intention to kill, only recklessness as to the possibility.

Silver lining; next time I run amok with an axe, I expect it to incur no more than this minor inconvenience.

It's not like he's refused to pay his council tax or let someone smoke in the bar. Not like a proper crime.

Woman on a Raft said...

For comparison: the Emma West trial has been put back to September, presumably to avoid another political embarrassment like the Terry trial.

However, we can compare the 21 weeks sentence for Jacqueline Woodhouse, who didn't try to cut anybody's throat but refused to stfu when told to on a train.

How does this work? A paltry charge leading to a 32 weeks sentence for half-killing some poor bloke going about his lawful business, but two thirds of that for merely saying something people don't want to hear, and wouldn't have if they had left her alone to mutter instead winding her up.

The CPS are not fit for purpose, although no doubt they'll once again try to hide behind the courts.

http://news.sky.com/story/22747/woman-jailed-for-racist-abuse-on-tube-train

ranter said...

I read this in the fantastic NEWS SHOPPER last week directly after reading the story where a vicious robber (yes, he was black - I really hoped he wouldn't be too) had got 18 months imprisonment and the comments went mad saying how lenient that was. Then you see this case and, as others have said, it really does illustrate the lack of , at the very least, common sense, inherent in our CJ system and in our local CPS offices. The officer probably really is genuinely satisfied and pleased with the result in comparison to the occasions when hours, days and weeks of work is rendered wasted in the normal course of events.

Pavlov's Cat said...

I wondered when you would get to this one.

surely attacking someone with an axe is attempted murder.

There's no way you can say I was just trying to wound him?

Anonymous said...

PC, The problem with gaining a conviction of murder or attempted murder is to show that there was an intent to murder. Someone holding an axe to a person's throat is certainly worth more than an £80 Fixed Penalty Notice, but as long as the perpetrator (I got that word off CSI) keeps claiming that he/she intended to only frighten the victim, then a conviction for murder/attempt murder is a no-go! There used to be a court acceptance of "What would the person on the Clapham Omnibus think"? but as the current users of the Clapham omnibuses seem to be illegal immigrants, potential suicide bombers or owe their allegiance to a foreign state, this term is no longer in use.

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't read to much into the quote by the police officer.Our press section make them up as they all have the same soundbite which is normally "sends out a clear message that-insert crime here-will not be tolerated on this borough".If they really asked the average PC after a verdict it would probably read "he's a scumbag who deserves to get hung by his thumbs".But's that's not PC enough.(The other meaning of PC).
Jaded

JuliaM said...

"It's pure sophistry to argue that does not entail an intention to kill, only recklessness as to the possibility. "

Indeed. The CPS needs serious attention, but is unlikely to get it.

".Our press section make them up ..."

We know. We've seen how much stock to place on initial statements!

Anonymous said...

I am reading through some of these reviews and find it really disgraceful of the things that are being said about Terry Stower. I was actually involved in this case personally and know the papers have exaggerated this story by far. This is not what happened the bus driver should never have got out of his cabin to verbally abuse him, hence why the sentence is so short! He cut no ones throat your all fucking vile human beings commenting on something that you actually know nothing about, this man has lost everything over a lying obnoxious bus driver who was not doing his job properly as he wouldnt have left the cabin with passengers on to abuse him while he was parked up in his van.

Anonymous said...

Victim, he was no victim, Why do people believe everything they read, As for DC Jones maybe you should change your career if you cant tell the truth!!!!

JuliaM said...

"I am reading through some of these reviews and find it really disgraceful of the things that are being said about Terry Stower."

What, that he was a violent nutter who kept a convenient axe about his person?

At 53 years old, he's no impetuous youth, is he? Rather makes me wonder what else he's done that he's never been caught for...

Anonymous said...

No... Actually if you new what you was talking about and read the report thoroughly you would have known that it was a work van equipped with tools, So maybe you should stop making assumptions lady!!!!!!

JuliaM said...

It's not an 'assumption' that he's gone down for ABH is it? I guess the jury wasn't convinced either...

Anonymous said...

And only got eight months!!!!! What about self defense, was that mentioned... No!!! When your sitting in your van, and a men shouting abuse through your window of your parked van minding your on business. A glue stitch to the neck is hardly getting his throat cut!

JuliaM said...

"And only got eight months!"

Well, yes. Congratulations on finally, finally grasping the point of the post. It definitely should have been longer, you're right about that...

"When your sitting in your van, and a men shouting abuse through your window of your parked van minding your on business."

...you reach for a weapon and attack him with it? You DO realise that isn't the action of a normal person, right?

That's the action of the sort of person who, I have to save, takes a particularly gormless-looking mugshot....

"A glue stitch to the neck is hardly getting his throat cut!"

Once again, we're in agreement. It should have been GBH. Cutting someone in the neck area should be treated the same as kicking someone in the head.

Anonymous said...

No, we are in no agreement he shouldn't of even got eight months! as i said self defense!!! Anyway i will not be responding to your comments any more as i find you quit exasperating, As for your blogs in the future.. And thought this would be common knowledge for you to do so in your line of work.. is to do your research and get the full facts on something your read first, before to slander someones name! please don't comment back I'm not interested in any more you have to say .. thank you.

JuliaM said...

I think you need to do a bit of research on the legal definition of slander yourself...