A mum today told how a glassing attack by a council care worker has “destroyed” her life.Surely that should read ‘ex-council care worker’..?
Amazingly enough, it seems not:
Judge Stephen Clarke said it was clear the violence was sparked because Bennett’s “loud-mouthed” then- girlfriend was “spoiling for an incident” and got into a row with Mrs Coggins’s friend.
Bennett’s ex-partner ended up falling over, sparking his “moment of madness”.Ahhh, right. Well, we’ll just have to hope he doesn’t have a similar ‘moment of madness’ while on duty, eh?
…at Liverpool Crown Court on Friday, Judge Clarke showed Bennett, who had no previous convictions, mercy after reading glowing references from his bosses and colleagues at the council and learning he is the sole carer for his grandmother, who is terminally ill, and his grandfather, who has dementia.
He suspended a 26-week jail sentence for two years, subjected Bennett to a three-month, electronically-monitored curfew, ordered him to do 200 hours unpaid work and pay Mrs Coggins £1,200 in compensation.Yes, his bosses and colleague wrote ‘glowing references’ for a man who glassed a woman.
Nice bunch, eh?
Mrs Coggins said: “I am happy with the sentence. My husband wanted him jailed but everyone is different.
“I think as someone who works with young adults he should lose his job. I work in the same industry and I wouldn’t want to work with someone who could do something like that.”Most people wouldn’t. But I guess that’s Liverpool for you…
Hmmm I've just read the article and it sounds like he didn't actually 'glass' her with intent.
She suffered almost no wounds beoynd a cut above her eye. That says to me that it wasn't an intentional glassing.
You punch a glass into someone's face with force...ie with intent...then there is no way they'll just have a cut above there eye..they'll be lucky to still have eyes or a face.
Also the fact he pleaded 'not guilty' would indicate that he hadn't actually intended to do it. If there was the slightest doubt in his lawyer's mind as to his client's innocence then he would have advised him to plead guilty...because it is almost impossible to get a fair trial when it's a male violence on a 'member of the fairer sex' case. At the very least his lawyer would have horse traded for 'Common Assault'.
"then there is no way they'll just have a cut above THEIR eye"
I apologise for any pain or distress caused to those of a sensitive grammatical nature.
"Just What Do You Have To Do To Get Sacked From Liverpool Council Care Services?"
Over the last decade, a super computer has been performing the myriad analyses required and an answer is expected soon.
On my way to Huddersfield Infirmary to have that 'beoynd' shard removed from my left eye. :)
No such thing as "justice" anymore...only "the cheaper option". We can all pretty much do as we please now so long as it doesn't cost the state too much money.
This being Liverpool I'm suprised that it made it into a court. Those that work for the system must still believe that the system works.
Lessons will be learned.
On my way to Huddersfield Infirmary to have that 'beoynd' shard removed from my left eye. :)"
LOL...don't understand why spellczech didn't pick up on that typo...
"But I guess that’s Liverpool for you…"
No, it's not that parochial - this dovetails quite nicely with Duggan's recent Guardian eulogist being a yoof support worker.
Still, as long as smokers or the slightly overweight aren't looking after children...
Unfair to scousers I say being one myself. BTW need any hub caps?
Hey, you should what the non-carers do.
To be fair, had he carried out an attack in the course of his duties then yes, he would/should automatically lose his job. This was on a night out, and unless there's a question that he'd behave like this when sober/at work then why should he lose his job?
I work with kids every day, and get wicked pissed at the weekend and have had the occasional altercation as a result, but if anyone was to suggest that doing so raised any doubt as to my suitability to work with kids I'd defend myself very robustly indeed since it does no such thing.
Fairy cross the Mersey
Lovin' the name :D
"... it sounds like he didn't actually 'glass' her with intent."
Yes, those defence solicitors are jolly good at what they do, eh?
"Those that work for the system must still believe that the system works. "
They must be the only ones!
"This was on a night out, and unless there's a question that he'd behave like this when sober/at work then why should he lose his job?"
Because it doesn't say much for his self-control?
Post a Comment