You can tell they are from Hull, with them trying to steal the poor blokes shirt

Er, they are both from Normanton actually.

It does seem a little lenient.

Also, with clear CCTV evidence, why nearly a year and a half to get resolved?

If you seriously want to know what goes on in a magistrates head when he/she considers sentencing then you may want to have a look at [url=http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/magistrates_court_sentencing_guidelines_update.pdfThe Magistrates Sentencing Guidelines[/url and in particular pages 26 to 28 which cover ABH and all of the mitigating circumstances which have to be taken into account.

Then go ahead have a Daily Mail rant.

No he would have been dealt with a more punitive charge and punishment.

Thats how it works, read the guidelines.

This is appauling, just what exactly do you have to do to get sent down these days. Makes no wonder that there are incidents like this in most towns up and down the country when the "punishment" is so ridiculous.

For those that say there are not enough available spaces in prison to cater for criminals like this, what is stopping us building some more prisons, and employing people in the process?

There is so little discipline in society these days, and it's not going to change until punishments fit crimes and there are effective deterrents in place.

Disgraceful.

FFS



Click the link at the top of the page and do some research for yourself !!!

it wasn't there when I started typing....

Thanks.



Also if that's what the rules say it must be right, couldn't possibly have the rules wrong could we?

How would you feel if it was one of your kids on the receiving end of that sort of criminal incident?

If you get down to your local Crown Court next week I'm sure there will be more than enough lengthy custodial sentences handed down to keep you happy.
P.S. if you ask really nicely I'll tell you which Judges to look out for

The intent was the same fortunately for the victim he suffered no long term effects - looking at the footage Cockayne intended to inflict as much pain as possible.

OK so reading that, I'm assuming he should have been sentenced in the highest category, bearing in mind he used a weapon (a shod foot - section c) and the risk of harm was high through kicking a prone victim to a vulnerable part of the body - section cii).

From that looking at the sentencing I would guess that there was provocation and a guilty plea both of which would lead to the lower sentence received.

Anywhere near?