Another knife attack in london



Not guilty of attempted murder, guilty of wounding with intent.
Judge refuses to allow jury to be told of two previous convictions of wounding with intent from 97 where the suspect used a machete in those attacks too.
 
duff_man said:
Not guilty of attempted murder, guilty of wounding with intent.
Judge refuses to allow jury to be told of two previous convictions of wounding with intent from 97 where the suspect used a machete in those attacks too.
Click to expand...

What reason would the judge have for not letting previous similar offences be admitted? Seems a bizarre decision.
 
duff_man said:
Not guilty of attempted murder, guilty of wounding with intent.
Judge refuses to allow jury to be told of two previous convictions of wounding with intent from 97 where the suspect used a machete in those attacks too.
Click to expand...
I know I jerk your chain now and then, but serious question, you lads must get royally pissed off, after putting in the work to catch and convict these fuckers, only for the courts to do something like this, how come this type of stuff happens so frequently these days, sometimes it seems like the judges are pissed.
 
duff_man said:
Not guilty of attempted murder, guilty of wounding with intent.
Judge refuses to allow jury to be told of two previous convictions of wounding with intent from 97 where the suspect used a machete in those attacks too.
Click to expand...

A f***ing disgrace. Convicted rapist too.

Absolute oxygen thief who hopefully will get murdered in prison.
 
ivanthereasonable said:
Did i just read he's been convicted of rape in the past ? Bloke wants locked up forever.
Click to expand...

Yeah back in about 82 I think I read. Obviously just a misunderstood character.
max wartbug said:
What reason would the judge have for not letting previous similar offences be admitted? Seems a bizarre decision.
Click to expand...

I have no idea, given how similar they were in nature I would argue that it was very much in the public interest for his previous to be admissable at trail. The man obviously just likes to carry around a machete with him.
Teed said:
I know I jerk your chain now and then, but serious question, you lads must get royally pissed off, after putting in the work to catch and convict these fuckers, only for the courts to do something like this, how come this type of stuff happens so frequently these days, sometimes it seems like the judges are pissed.
Click to expand...

It has always been said that judges have a very warped view of reality. It will be interesting if at sentencing tomorrow he explains why he made his decision.
 
Last edited:
duff_man said:
Yeah back in about 82 I think I read. Obviously just a misunderstood character.


I have no idea, given how similar they were in nature I would argue that it was very much in the public interest for his previous to be admissable at trail. The man obviously just likes to carry around a machete with him.


It has always been said that judges have a very warped view of reality. It will be interesting if at sentencing tomorrow he explains why he made his decision.
Click to expand...
He should be made to explain it, boils my piss when I read about some criminal being sentenced and then read he's been done dozens and dozens of times before, if some only got a year for each crime they committed they be serving a life sentence, yet they get away with it time after time.
 
Watch the attack on the news,you can hear the blade striking,no-way that should be simply wounding with intent,the footage is on sky news.
 
I think he may have been some kind of gardener, but who the hell carries around a 2ft rusty machete FFS and thinks "I'll use this on a person".
Should have been sent down
 
Unless there’s a psychiatric or similar element to put doubt to his state of mind, I don’t see how you can hit someone in the head with a machete and it be anything else other than attempted murder.
 

Back
Top