Boxer blocked in by selfish ****s, gets angry and is charged
Discussion
2 men come to a carpark which is full, so they think it is ok to leave a note saying 'call us if you need to get out' Driver of one of the blocked cars (Heavyweight boxer) happens to be coming back at that time who tells them that he is in a hurry and for them to move the car.
They instead "keep walking to the Post office" When they return from the post office he is livid, tells them he is late for his appointment and threatens to knock them out, instead of moing their car, they call the old bill. Police turn up, he decides to 'keeps it real' and so end up with community service.
Feel a bit sorry for him, the fact that he didn't actually knock them out there and then shows that it was just 'trash talk' surely? A week earlier had lost his European title too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2880171/I-...
They instead "keep walking to the Post office" When they return from the post office he is livid, tells them he is late for his appointment and threatens to knock them out, instead of moing their car, they call the old bill. Police turn up, he decides to 'keeps it real' and so end up with community service.
Feel a bit sorry for him, the fact that he didn't actually knock them out there and then shows that it was just 'trash talk' surely? A week earlier had lost his European title too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2880171/I-...
superkartracer said:
Yeah but if you punch people in the face you go to prison and get bummed.
i doubt anyone would be bumming derek chisora in a hurry. in this case he did not punch anyone, so got community service for shouting. what a joke. the two stbags that called the police should have been fined for the inconsiderate parking.Yazar said:
2 men come to a carpark which is full, so they think it is ok to leave a note saying 'call us if you need to get out' Driver of one of the blocked cars (Heavyweight boxer) happens to be coming back at that time who tells them that he is in a hurry and for them to move the car.
They instead "keep walking to the Post office" When they return from the post office he is livid, tells them he is late for his appointment and threatens to knock them out, instead of moing their car, they call the old bill. Police turn up, he decides to 'keeps it real' and so end up with community service.
Erm - it wasn't a public car park, it was the resident's private parking which the boxer had dumped his car in. They came home to find that there was nowhere to park, so parked blocking him in and left a note. They instead "keep walking to the Post office" When they return from the post office he is livid, tells them he is late for his appointment and threatens to knock them out, instead of moing their car, they call the old bill. Police turn up, he decides to 'keeps it real' and so end up with community service.
That law isn't intended to be used for obstruction offences, it's for immobilisation and fundamentally aimed at rogue vehicle immobilisers. That's why it requires intention. Leaving a note with contact numbers on so the driver can come back to the vehicle causing the issue suggests an intention not to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle.
If it's criminal, it's Regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (unnecessary obstruction). As is pointed out, there may be private / public issues.
If it's criminal, it's Regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (unnecessary obstruction). As is pointed out, there may be private / public issues.
La Liga said:
That law isn't intended to be used for obstruction offences, it's for immobilisation and fundamentally aimed at rogue vehicle immobilisers. That's why it requires intention. Leaving a note with contact numbers on so the driver can come back to the vehicle causing the issue suggests an intention not to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle.
If it's criminal, it's Regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (unnecessary obstruction). As is pointed out, there may be private / public issues.
You're quite right about intent, and the note might show contrary intention. However, when Chisora asked them to move the car, they refused and carried on with what they were doing (going to the Post Office). At that point their intention was clearly to continue immobilising Chisora's car, in the words of Chisora's lawyer, because they didn't like the way they were being spoken to. That is where the note is superseded by their actions.If it's criminal, it's Regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (unnecessary obstruction). As is pointed out, there may be private / public issues.
It sounds like Chisora is a deeply unpleasant person and he deserved what he got, however.
allergictocheese said:
At that point their intention was clearly to continue immobilising Chisora's car, in the words of Chisora's lawyer, because they didn't like the way they were being spoken to. That is where the note is superseded by their actions.
The driver's intent, when parking, was to go to the post office. The driver's intent, when challenged by Chisora, was to go to the post office. The note (which is still very relevant) reinforces the aforementioned. An indirect consequence of the intent to go to the post office resulted in preventing the vehicle being removed, and a continuation of such, but that doesn't count.
Practically, and we're speaking practically since we were talking about them both being dealt with formally, how would you ever prove the relevant intent for the offence to be made out the circumstances? The circumstances we have simply don't support the offence in question. Primarily because it's not designed for these scenarios.
They were at the car and were made aware by Chisora that he wanted them to move their vehicle. They refused to do so and instead decided to leave him blocked in whist they went about their business. At the point they refused to move their vehicle the intention is patently to keep Chisora from being able to move his and the offence is made out. That they were planning to go to the Post Office before, during or after is neither here nor there, as there is no rule that says there can only be one intention. People often do things for a number of reasons and if any one of them matches the offence here, it is complete.
Edited by allergictocheese on Friday 19th December 12:55
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff