surrey jim
Not in Surrey
Is this the same Adam McDermott ? http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8390735.Brighton_thief_does_time_for_watch_raids/
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Let's catch the scumbag who did this
- Thread starter Man of Harveys
- Start date
Is this the same Adam McDermott ? http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8390735.Brighton_thief_does_time_for_watch_raids/
StonehamPark
#Brighton-Nil
The age matches, so it's likely as there's only 1 Adam McDermott listed openly in the BN postcode area (open source).
Good digging.
Amazed at the relative condition of the victim........must say something for the design of the Fiat 500 and bumpers etc (can see the front of the car clearly crumpling on impact). Remarkable. If it had been a 4x4 (for example) at that speed he wouldn't have stood a chance.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 8,090
She's his "bird" according to the Facebook feed, above. Thought that term went out with Steptoe & Son.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
Adam McDermott FB Link
Maintaining his innocence (last post).
Just curious as to why he was hiding on the roof whilst his Mum stopped the OB going in for him though.
All open source info - for reference.
Thanks for posting. Reminds me why I don't use FB, never have used FB and never intend to use it. For various different reasons, my eyes hurt.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
If you read the comments on that FB shot, there is one that would suggest it could well be...
SIMMO SAYS
Well-known member
You are on the wrong thread at the wrong time so doodle off and knit a sweater out of noodles
Oh and please don't post any more lilly liberal views
Leekbrookgull
Well-known member
and that Bull Bars are banned.
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
I was a magistrate for 9 years
Don't think he'll be charged with GBH, the injury element is included in Aggravated vehicle taking.
Got a feeling Mr McDermott will get his come uppance at some point.
symyjym
Banned
If you were to hazard a guess, what will be difference in sentence if he pleads guilty or not guilty?
Wrong-Direction
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 13,639
I can't wait to hear the news that his house has burnt down with him in it[emoji23]
StonehamPark
#Brighton-Nil
But the aggravated vehicle taking is an entirely separate offence to the injury caused to the victim.
Also, there's no AVT if the current suspect is the perpetrator (if it's a story/fob).
He lives in a block of flats so not a wise move!
symyjym
Banned
But the aggravated vehicle taking is an entirely separate offence to the injury caused to the victim.
Also, there's no AVT if the current suspect is the perpetrator (if it's a story/fob).
He lives in a block of flats so not a wise move!
It will have to be the using an electric fire in the bathroom trick then.
Wrong-Direction
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 13,639
Whoopsidaisy[emoji50]But the aggravated vehicle taking is an entirely separate offence to the injury caused to the victim.
Also, there's no AVT if the current suspect is the perpetrator (if it's a story/fob).
He lives in a block of flats so not a wise move!
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
If you plead guilty at the first opportunity, you are entitled to a one third reduction in sentence; this reduces on a sliding scale down to 10% if you plead guilty at the start of a trial.
This means that for a summary only offence (ie triable only in a magistrate's court), if you go guilty at first hearing, the maximum you can be given is four months (two thirds of the six months maximum). Government policy called early release means you'll serve half then be released on license. Prison governors also have the authority to release prisoners early but I'm not sure how early.
For Dangerous Driving, its triable "Either way" meaning it can be sent to Crown court if serious enough. In that situation magistrates can impose a full 6 months, the early guilty reduction being not sending it to Crown court where the sentence would have been higher (if that makes sense).
Of course magistrates never say (out the back of course) "this feller deserves about a month inside" then go out and say "if you hadn't pleaded guilty it would have been three months, we've reduced that to two, so you'll actually serve a month"
Buzzer
Languidly Clinical
- Oct 1, 2006
- 26,121
Unfortunately, criminals can play the system and win. I once went to Chichester Crown Court as a witness in an assault case. Drunk bloke was bashing his girlfriend in Worthing Station car park one night. Myself and the 50-something year old train guard ran at him to stop him. I've no idea what I was going to do when I got to the bloke as he was absolutely huge and I was very scared but fortunately (?) the bloke resolved the issue by pulling out a metal bar, swinging and missing the guard's head by inches. Bloke drives away with gf back home where he beat her up some more. The babysitter notices she's bleeding from between the legs (victim was 4 months pregnant) so bloke drives to Southlands with gf. Police arrest bloke at hospital and he's later bailed with instructions not to contact her.
She didn't want to press charges and he broke his bail conditions and he pleaded not guilty but police had enough evidence so we all went to Chichester Crown Court. The bloke changed his plea to guilty at the very last minute. He got a pre-sentence psychiatric evaluation and then later a conditional discharge on the condition that he attended anger management sessions because in mitigation he was back with his girlfriend, the baby had been born by that stage and he was the breadwinner. And just to rub salt into the wounds, she had a right go at the guard and me outside the courts for being grasses! The bloke even asked for his metal pipe back as he was a roofer and said it was part of his equipment!
I really hope they throw the book at this McDermott chap if he's found guilty.
StonehamPark
#Brighton-Nil
Thoughts [MENTION=13947]happypig[/MENTION] ?
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
Not sure what you're referencing.
I'm looking at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/12A which seems to fit the bill. However, I'm not a lawyer and don't know the details so we'll have to wait and see what (if) the CPS charge it as.
StonehamPark
#Brighton-Nil
I'm talking about Charging GBH (Max 5) alongside Dangerous Driving (Max 2).
For anyone else interested and unaware, S20 = Section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.
Case references:
R v Collins [2010] 1 Cr.App.R.(S.) 35 - D pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and to causing grievous bodily harm. During a police chase in which D drove dangerously he collided with a taxi, gravely injuring the driver. It was entirely appropriate for the Judge to have considered that D had, in effect, used his car as a guided missile. A sentence of 21 months for dangerous driving concurrent to 4 years for s20 was not excessive. However, a period of disqualification which would extend for a substantial period of time after an offender's release from prison might invite the offender to commit further offences in relation to motor vehicles; 8 years disqualification reduced to 5 years.
R v Kaeppner [2012] EWCA Crim 158 - D pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and s20 where serious injury was caused to another person as a result of the dangerous driving. A sentence of 2 years for the s20 concurrent to 12 months for the dangerous driving with 4 months concurrent for excess alcohol was not manifestly excessive. The Court held that "This was on any view a bad case which was rightly charged under the section 20 provisions to reflect the appalling injuries sustained by Mr S (see R v Baines [2005] EWCA Crim. 107 and R v Stranney [2007] EWCA Crim. 2847). Severe though the sentence was for a 20-year-old of effective good character, it was purely a matter of chance that Mr S was not killed in which case the appellant would have faced a significantly longer sentence".