AddThis SmartLayers

Judge refuses to let daily name teen thugs who left boy in coma

A judge refused to let a regional daily name two teenagers who put a boy in a coma – claiming they were only trying to increase sales of the newspaper.

Judge Roger Elsey rejected Newcastle-based daily The Chronicle’s application to lift the anonymity afforded to the defendants, who walked free from court despite leaving their victim with life-changing injuries as a result of the attack.

The pair, both aged 16, pleaded guilty to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, after Sunderland Magistrates’ Court heard they had repeatedly punched the victim in the head while drifting in and out of consciousness.

Despite this, Judge Elsey declined The Chronicle’s request to allow them to be named.

He said: “The public’s interest here lies in the rehabilitation of these offenders and not in increasing the sales of the Evening Chronicle.”

The judge then handed the pair a referral order and ordered both parents to pay £500 in compensation.

Sunderland Magistrates' Court

Sunderland Magistrates’ Court

The Chronicle reported that prior to sentencing, Janette Smith, prosecuting, explained how one of the attackers punched the victim repeatedly in the head until he fell to his knees crying out in pain.

One witness told police that the victim was kicked in the head and that, as he tried to walk away, the other attacker struck, pulling the boy upright by his collar and punching him over and over until he started to vomit.

In a statement read out in court, his mum said: “Nothing will ever be the same for our family. Our lives were changed overnight. We’re always on tenterhooks, it isn’t fair for him not to be able to live a normal life.”

The teenager has problems with his memory and is struggling with schoolwork, the court heard.

Joanne Gatens, defending one of the attackers, said: “It was never intended to be more than a disagreement between school boys. The severity of the injuries was not foreseen.”

Shaun McFaul, representing the other, added: “It is something that is seen every day in school yards and parks over the country. There was no intent that he would end up in the state he did.”

The Chronicle has been approached for a comment on the story.

3 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • January 9, 2017 at 9:36 am
    Permalink

    Regardless of the legal arguments here, the judge’s comment about the Chronicle’s sales figures is extremely telling. It ill behoves the judiciary to slip in such snide sideswipes, and is actually quite unusual. It is also clearly partial. Not good.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(30)
  • January 9, 2017 at 12:14 pm
    Permalink

    It could be argued the judge is bringing even more attention to the story – and thus promoting sales – with this decision.
    Others will probably pick it up and there may be a reader backlash via the letters pages, giving it legs. Etc.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(4)
  • January 9, 2017 at 2:03 pm
    Permalink

    I sincerely hope that the Chronicle not only rebuts this comment by the Judge but also questions why he passed such a lenient sentence. One can only assume that the Judge merely listened to the defendants'; solicitors and completely ignored the evidence in front of him.
    It may not be relevant to the issue on HTFP but how two lawyers can claim that the “severity of the injuries was not forseen” and “there was no intent” the victim would end up in such a condition after being repeatedly punched and kicked in the head is absolutely baffling. That’s what I would be writing in the Chronicle.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(16)