[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-29015072 ]story link[/url]
Good ridance to the bloke that was killed I say, having read the chain of events he sounds like a scumbag who got what he deserved.
Harsh?????
What do the stw jury think?
I agree. I've always felt that the proportionate response to mugging is murder. 🙂
*Don't feed the trolls*
Good on Derek Grant, there's no way he should have been jailed, even more so when Bradley stabbed him first.
The mugger was a Scumbag who got what he deserved.
The rest is just process and procedure.
Scumbag who got what he deserved.
which one?
i'm sure when we are living in an islamic state it'll be different.
Game of knifey spoony gone horrible wrong.
I agree. I've always felt that the proportionate response to mugging is murder.
Did you read the story or just comment regardless. It wasn't murder, even the court agreed with that.
The fact that when confronted the muggers response was to stab the defendent in the ey speaks volumes
Meh. Should have called the law.
Did you read the story or just comment regardless. It wasn't murder, even the court agreed with that.The fact that when confronted the muggers response was to stab the defendent in the ey speaks volumes
Sorry, I've read it now.
Agree 100%, he deserved to die. I'm very happy he is dead 🙂
The fact that when confronted [b]by three men, one armed with a knife[/b] the muggers response was to stab the defendent in the ey speaks volumes
fixed that...
Surely the fact he went armed shouldn't prevent the claim of self-defence - it's not as if he attacked the other bloke or wanted to use violence.
Of course he could have just given back the iPhone, jambo.
every action has a reaction, or shit happens....... 😀
Can't be sad that Bradley is a gonner but Grant was rightfully jailed for being stupid.
Sorry, I've read it now.Agree 100%, he deserved to die. I'm very happy he is dead
🙂
If there's one thing we all need it's more knife wielding vigilantism. It's doing wonders in Iraq right now.
All you needed to do was to phone the police and give them the information. However, you armed yourself with a knife and, along with your three sons, went looking for him
Nevertheless, the fact is you took the law into your own hands and went looking for a man you knew was armed with a knife armed with a weapon of your own
One thug hunts down another thug and one of them dies.
In what way is Derek Grant some sort of vigilante hero?
Got no sympathy for the jailed guy. Armed himself with a knife and took his 3 sons along. Anyone harming my son and I'd happily stab him. This was nothing like it. If you want to protect someone you dont take them to trouble.
I thought we used the term manslaughter for this not homicide?
Difficult one, he did kill the guy and he did go out with a knife so he put himself in the situation on purpose and went armed with a weapon.
But, with knowledge of the event limited to what is in that article, I would say that just because someone take a knife it doesnt mean they actually intend to use it to hurt or kill someone and maybe hoping it would act as deterrent to any violence knowing the other party is armed with a knife.
At the end of the day they have to discourage people taking matters into their own hands and his actions did exacerbate things.
the stabbed in the eye bit makes me wince though.
He went looking for the mugger with a knife that shows intent, because his son was robbed it doesn't give him the right to kill him. Given the fact he had located his whereabouts using find my phone and went along with his sons I think the judge was fair in his sentence.
I thought we used the term manslaughter for this not homicide?
Not in Scotland you don't.
He ordered the politics student to hand over his iPhone, which he did.
Hardly the crime of the century was it? His son got home safe.
Not in Scotland you don't.
thought that was the reason.
Hardly the crime of the century was it? His son got home safe.
I agree. Had the murdered man cut the murderers kid or stabbed him up then you might understand it. Like this, not so much.
Am I the only one reading this comment from the judge and thinking that if he'd done as the judge is presumably suggesting and reported it to the police that the police would have done nothing and scrote would have got away with it? All very well to describe the theoretical situation of him ending up in court, but how likely is that actually?
Had he been caught it seems likely given his record that he would have been prosecuted in this court, the High Court, and on conviction would have received a High Court sentence."As it happens you had the means to bring him to justice because the phone had been easily located by the Find My iPhone app."
I would say that just because someone take a knife it doesnt mean they actually intend to use it to hurt or kill someone
yes dibble oh the knife , I was off to tesco to buy some scones and butter, the fact some thieving scumbag has nicked my lads phone and I'm off to kick his ****ing head in has no bearing on it.
honestly sad he has to do three years poor bloke, Personally I would have done the same and the 3 years inside would have been well worth it
Took an offensive weapon onto the street without a good alibi. That shows intent as others have said.
There is also the fact he'd previously been convicted of violence on ten occasions. Why are the courts so poor at preventing violent recidivism?aracer - Member
Am I the only one reading this comment from the judge and thinking that if he'd done as the judge is presumably suggesting and reported it to the police that the police would have done nothing and scrote would have got away with it? All very well to describe the theoretical situation of him ending up in court, but how likely is that actually?
If you talk to police, they very often know who is committing random acts of crime and violence, but witnesses are too scared to press charges. Often incidents go up as soon as a known, usual suspect is released from their joke sentence.
One moron ended up dead. The other moron ended up In prison. Death is definitely not a proportionate response but you play with knives......
A violent criminal with a long criminal record has been permanently removed from society. Perhaps his next armed mugging would have resulted in an innocent life lost. Even with the cost of this court case and sentence think of the money and resources saved in the long run, he was 29 and already had 10 convictions for violence. How many more would he have accrued over the remainder of his lifetime? Good riddance I say.
I feel sorry for the guy who got 6 years from this, he deserved to be sentenced for carrying a knife, and he must have known the risk, but 6 years is harsh.
What needs to be addressed is the system that allows these thugs to be wandering the streets time after time committing violent crimes, and the fact that people don't even bother going to the police for this sort of thing as it is increasingly a complete waste of time.
6 years and an eye.
Am I the only one reading this comment from the judge and thinking that if he'd done as the judge is presumably suggesting and reported it to the police that the police would have done nothing and scrote would have got away with it? All very well to describe the theoretical situation of him ending up in court, but how likely is that actually?
My thoughts exactly.
tpbiker - MemberThe fact that when confronted the muggers response was to stab the defendent in the ey speaks volumes
Yeah, because when you're confronted with a gang of 4 men, at least one of which has a knife, your best bet is to call ACAS 😆
It's pretty indefensible and I reckon the court's called it right.
joolsburger - Member
Meh. Should have called the law.
What, so they can add the stat to another list and ignore it?
TBH I see this as a lack of confidence in the police (seemingly rightly so), forcing ppl into take action. Not that I advocate violence, though I ain't gunna start crying over the consequence for either of these guys
Edit: Bugger GL beat me to it.
Lives lost and ruined over a kin phone. This reflects well on consumerism does it not?
I feel sorry for the guy who got 6 years from this, he deserved to be sentenced for carrying a knife, and he must have known the risk, but 6 years is harsh.
He got 6 years for killing someone. He went out with a knife looking for trouble, he's lucky he didn't get longer.
They both sound like thugs.
No sane person goes after a mugger armed with a knife. He took his sons as back-up in case he got into trouble himself. He deserves jail IMO.
So what if the police do nothing if an iPhone is stolen. Better that than one person dead and another blinded.
[quote=neilwheel said]6 years and an eye.
And, he'll only do 3 of those years inside.
Yeah, because when you're confronted with a gang of 4 men, at least one of which has a knife, your best bet is to call ACAS
or just give back the phone?
I feel sorry for the guy who got 6 years from this, he deserved to be sentenced for carrying a knife, and he must have known the risk, but...............
Context
neilwheel said » 6 years and an eye.
[b]AtP[/b] - And, he'll only do 3 of those years inside.
The judge added: "I take into account you will have to live with the physical consequences of that event for the rest of your life and I have reduced the sentence accordingly.
The point was he made a very bad choice, and with people on here calling him a thug. If he had gone with a blunter instrument, it's probable that his son would have got his phone back, the mugger may have ended up with some injuries and possibly learnt a lesson, and he would have both eyes and not be spending any time in jail.
I don't think anyone on here knows if the phone was insured or could be replaced. This all happened on a Friday night so what realistic chance was there of the Police turning up within a reasonable amount of time to recover it.
Did the son get the phone back?
The police take street robbery pretty seriously but not if you don't tell them about it until you've lost and eye and killed someone.
This seems like a pretty shitty outcome all round, oh and a man is dead which seems a bit over the top for nicking a phone.
Conviction right but dead bloke chose to live a life where chance of death was increased so little sympathy for him. If more people were concerned about the potential for the victim to get his own back then perhaps there'd be less violence - kinda like the nuclear threat?!
From the judge's statement
At the High Court in Livingston judge Lord Boyd noted that Bradley "was a man of violence" and had "10 convictions for assault" prior to his death."Had he been caught it seems likely given his record that he would have been prosecuted in this court, the High Court, and on conviction would have received a High Court sentence.
Speaks volumes about the justice system. Given the guy had 10 convictions for assault I actually find it highly unlikely that the high court would have given out any punishment that would have been appropriate.
Vigilante violence isn't the answer, but when someone with that level of violent history is still roaming the streets, it's no wonder people are driven to take matters into their own hands.
And I'm no parent, but I was mugged when I was about 12 and had my bike taken off me by a boy who was probably about ten years older than me. Got home and told my parents, and my dad jumped in the car with me and spent the next few hours driving the streets looking for the guy. Thankfully my old man didn't have a knife, but I reckon if he'd found the guy he would have killed him. And for the record my dad is a quiet, respectable man but I can completely understand how someone would protect their children and seek retribution. It's just sad that these things often spiral out of control.
The courts take a dim view of vigilantism. Probably rightly so, considering the alternative.
Was it a 5C or 5S?
