Court Character Reference

[AlVal]

A guy I worked with for about 2 years, but haven't seen in about 2 years, has asked if I could provide a character reference for court - He was a jovial guy, always enjoyed a laugh, always pleasant. Did have the opportunity to drink with him, on the typical work drinks evenings, always seemed to remain friendly after a few pints (not one of those who seems to get angry when drunk).

Looks like he's up on a serious charge though - apparantly, guy starts swearing at him in the pub, and knocks over his pint. He retaliates later in the evening, by punching him in the toilets after seeing him go in there. I don't like the sound of that, as it kind of throws in a "premeditated" element? I like to assume that this isn't his normal style, and that this was some kind of one-off incident where he was seriously provoked. he broke the guy's jaw, guy had to have a metal plate and cant eat solids properly for 6 months

I always thought him to be a good sort. Is there any downside to providing a character witness letter for someone? I did always find him to be a nice lad, and he was good at his work - is there a reason I can't think of that I shouldn't do it?

[lawrence567]

Surely they're just asking you to write what he was like with you.
You had nice things to say & never witnessed anything bad, so surely you write the good things?

[Dan_1981]

I provided one for an old friend a few years ago.

Judge mentioned the fact that he had many positive references but went no further than that.

It's a decision for you to make. It's just a character reference and nothing more should come from it.

[voicey]

Just write the truth. Start with an intro as to who you are and how you know the guy (and how long, etc). Then go onto to say how you have observed him to behave and then you can (if you wish) speculate that this must have been a one off instance.

Don't write any lies or half lies or anything you are uncomfortable with. If it's not useful then his brief wont use it in court.

ETA: No downside if you tell the truth and keep it to your opinion.

[Soovy]

By all means give a reference, BUT TELL THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH about when you knew him. DO NOT BEND THE TRUTH.



I wonder why the only person he can think of to give a reference is someone he hasn't seen for two years.... Hmmmm?

[AlVal]

Soovy said:

By all means give a reference, BUT TELL THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH about when you knew him. DO NOT BEND THE TRUTH.



I wonder why the only person he can think of to give a reference is someone he hasn't seen for two years.... Hmmmm?

this crossed my mind, then I considered that he probably doesn't want people at his current place of employment knowing?

[ic0n]

From personal experience it's likely he'll be getting a custodial anyway.

http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Ass... (Page 15)

Character reference may help, but not much.

[zaphod42]

I seem to remember reading in either the lounge or SP&L sometime last year a story that was the complete opposite side of what may be the same story.

i.e. a chap was posting that his dad had done something completely out of character in assaulting the guy/broke his jaw in the toilets after an evening of abuse in the bar.

But I can't find it now, and I may have mis-remembered!

[AlVal]

ic0n said:

From personal experience it's likely he'll be getting a custodial anyway.

http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/Ass... (Page 15)

Character reference may help, but not much.

thanks for the very relevant link, it's very interesting to see the actual guidelines. I'm not the type to ever get in a fight myself, but it's very good to know how costly a punch-up could be, better to know now than finding out after a first-time fight, which I guess could happen to anyone. can't be that difficult to end up being provoked into throwing a punch and breaking someone's jaw I guess. I hope the courts are good at determining when this is a good guy provoked into a once-off as opposed to some scally type who's constantly fighting and thinks nothing of doing it, and that they use the discretion the guidelines afford them appropriately.

[Rawwr]

"He was a nice guy, until he got bummed by a heron behind some bins. Things changed for him after that."

[zaphod42]

AlVal said:

thanks for the very relevant link, it's very interesting to see the actual guidelines. I'm not the type to ever get in a fight myself, but it's very good to know how costly a punch-up could be, better to know now than finding out after a first-time fight, which I guess could happen to anyone. can't be that difficult to end up being provoked into throwing a punch and breaking someone's jaw I guess. I hope the courts are good at determining when this is a good guy provoked into a once-off as opposed to some scally type who's constantly fighting and thinks nothing of doing it, and that they use the discretion the guidelines afford them appropriately.

I don't know, I've managed 37 years and only punched someone hard once, and I was 8 in the playground. I got 100 lines.

Self defence in a fight in which you are attacked is one thing. Walking into the loos when you know the guy is alone is pre-meditated.

If you don't like a situation, walk away.

[Dr Jekyll]

What's the boundary between actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm?

[AlVal]

Dr Jekyll said:

What's the boundary between actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm?

blood / broken bones are relevant, by the looks of things

yahoo answers about 6 years ago said:

ABH is the proper charge where there is significant injury to another, eg extensive bruising, black eye, cuts requiring medical treatment, broken teeth or psychiatric harm. It can include the shedding of blood, except that there is an alternative charge of malicious wounding which is intended to cover such an injury. There is a tendency to be rather flexible about the range of injuries encompassed in the notion of ABH on the part of the CPS to keep the case in the magistrates' court, the idea being to cut down costs. There have been cases of injuries consistent with a charge of GBH being reduced to "ABH" by the CPS, who are anxious to avoid a jury trial, where there is an indication that a guilty plea might be forthcoming, as common assault can only be heard in the Magistrates' Court. Similarly charges of "ABH" are vert frequently reduced to charges of common assault by prosecutors determined to keep them in the Magistrates' Court. An offence of assault is tried in the magistrates' court, with a maximum fine of up to £5,000 and/or six months' imprisonment.

If there is a racial element to the assault, the individual may be charged with racially aggravated assault under Section 29 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. In the magistrates' court the penalty is the same as for common assault ­ a fine of up to £5,000, six months' imprisonment or both. In the Crown Court the penalty is two years' imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both.

Where the charge is one of ABH,.The maximum sentence in the magistrates' court is six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to £5,000 or both. In the Crown Court the maximum sanction is five years' imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both. As above, if the offence is racially aggravated, the sanction is the same in the magistrates' court but goes up to seven years imprisonment, an unlimited fine or both in the Crown Court.

Assaults which have more serious physical and mental consequences may be judged to be assaults occasioning grievous bodily harm (GBH), eg broken limbs or injuries resulting in lengthy treatment or incapacity. The penalties for GBH are severe, with the possibility of life imprisonment if the offence is committed with intent. For GBH without intent, the maximum sentence is five years' imprisonment.

Edited by AlVal on Thursday 26th May 11:57