Hill also breached a conditional discharge for a previous offence, but Mr Irish did not punish him for this because he was “near the end” of it.
Wha..?
He has 12 previous convictions for 14 offences with a history of violence.
Andrew Foreman, defending, said Hill did not have any money to get home and had tried to get back into the flat to get some cash from his ex.
Mr Foreman said the incident “would not have happened had he not been completely intoxicated”.
Sure. Was he 'completely intoxicated' the other 14 times, too?
He said the damage to the door was “moderate” and “in the context of the struggle” with the police officer, Hill “did not know” he spat at her.
Hill is a painter and decorator but has been out of work for the past few months.
Hardly surprising!
He cares for his brother, who has Asperger’s, Mr Foreman said.
*rolls eyes*
Magistrate Matthew Irish sentenced Hill to a 12-month community order, meaning he must carry out 60 hours of unpaid work, reduced from 90 because of his guilty plea.
*sighs*
5 comments:
He cares for his brother, who has Asperger’s, Mr Foreman said.
Which I would take to mean he receives a fair amount in benefits...probably Income support boosted up to make good the shortfall from the deduction of Careers Allowance, which isn't a great fortune but at a very absolute minimum leaves him with about £400 a month to live on, rent paid, no (or minimal) council tax and access to various other 'goodies' such as free Rx. £20 a week he will earn on top, which as a painter and decorator would be a piece of piss to find jobs 'you buy the paint and give me a pony and I'll paint your living room'. So all in all he will be on the better part of £500 a month cash with his rent paid (have I mentioned that already?).
So my sympathy is limited I'm afraid, anyone on £500 a month cash rent free should be able to live reasonably well if they are even a little 'canny' as Grandma would said. Baccy from Belgium and home brew to keep the alcoholism in check (which one suspects is the root of his problems).
Possibly, if he hadn't spent all his money on getting 'completely intoxicated', he would have had enough money to get home?
So for any driver who fails a breathalyser test, valid mitigating circumstances are that he/she was pissed at the time?
Bring back flogging!
"Which I would take to mean he receives a fair amount in benefits..."
I take it you're using 'fair' in the amount sense..?
"Possibly, if he hadn't spent all his money on getting 'completely intoxicated', he would have had enough money to get home?"
Well, now that's just crazy talk!
"So for any driver who fails a breathalyser test, valid mitigating circumstances are that he/she was pissed at the time?"
Heh! Seriously, someone ought to try that.
"Bring back flogging!"
I prefer the stocks.
Post a Comment