The latest on Sean Cahill
Discussion
THE brother of Socceroos star Tim Cahill has been jailed for four months for breaching bail after fleeing a serious assault charge in Britain.
Sean Cahill, 28, said he'd rushed back to Australia to farewell his dying grandmother.
Cahill today appeared in Croydon Crown Court in the south of London, where he pleaded guilty to a breach of bail over a vicious taxi rank bashing that left the alleged victim blind and with nerve damage.
Cahill, whose brother starred for Australia in the soccer World Cup last year, was out with friends when the fight started outside a nightclub in Bromley, Kent, on July 11, 2004.
He was arrested in February, 2005, and granted bail but fled to Australia before he could be tried on a charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent.
Cahill was arrested by NSW police in March this year after a request by British police and was extradited to the UK in May.
Counsel for Cahill told the court he had fled to Australia when he learned that his 73-year-old grandmother was on the verge of death.
“He took it upon himself and accepts full responsibility for prioritising that family commitment,” Cahill's counsel told the court.
“He knew what he had to face back in the UK and he has done so.”
Judge Stephen Waller sentenced Cahill to four months in prison over the breach of bail and ordered he stand trial on the assault on November 5.
“Breach of bail is always a serious matter, it interferes with the process of justice,” Judge Waller said.
“Only a custodial sentence is appropriate.”
Judge Waller refused to take into account the two months Cahill has already spent in custody, saying that would be considered at the end of the assault trial.
Cahill's legal team said there would be problems with the prosecution case because several key exhibits had been lost.
They included a pair of Cahill's boots which were seized and allegedly covered in DNA belonging to the victim.
It is alleged the attack on the victim included several kicks to the head and face.
The court was told police had lost or destroyed the boots and Judge Waller ordered prosecutors to compile statements outlining how such vital evidence had gone missing.
While on the run, Cahill found work in a security capacity at an Australian airport, the court also heard, raising questions about the adequacy of security checks for airport employees.
Judge Waller said a warrant was issued in the UK for Cahill's arrest after he failed to appear in court on May 11, 2005.
Despite the warrant, Cahill, who is believed to hold British and Australian passports, obtained clearance to work in secure parts of an Australian airport until his recapture earlier this year.
Cahill is a former goalkeeper who played for Wollongong Wolves and at an amateur level in England.
Sean Cahill, 28, said he'd rushed back to Australia to farewell his dying grandmother.
Cahill today appeared in Croydon Crown Court in the south of London, where he pleaded guilty to a breach of bail over a vicious taxi rank bashing that left the alleged victim blind and with nerve damage.
Cahill, whose brother starred for Australia in the soccer World Cup last year, was out with friends when the fight started outside a nightclub in Bromley, Kent, on July 11, 2004.
He was arrested in February, 2005, and granted bail but fled to Australia before he could be tried on a charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent.
Cahill was arrested by NSW police in March this year after a request by British police and was extradited to the UK in May.
Counsel for Cahill told the court he had fled to Australia when he learned that his 73-year-old grandmother was on the verge of death.
“He took it upon himself and accepts full responsibility for prioritising that family commitment,” Cahill's counsel told the court.
“He knew what he had to face back in the UK and he has done so.”
Judge Stephen Waller sentenced Cahill to four months in prison over the breach of bail and ordered he stand trial on the assault on November 5.
“Breach of bail is always a serious matter, it interferes with the process of justice,” Judge Waller said.
“Only a custodial sentence is appropriate.”
Judge Waller refused to take into account the two months Cahill has already spent in custody, saying that would be considered at the end of the assault trial.
Cahill's legal team said there would be problems with the prosecution case because several key exhibits had been lost.
They included a pair of Cahill's boots which were seized and allegedly covered in DNA belonging to the victim.
It is alleged the attack on the victim included several kicks to the head and face.
The court was told police had lost or destroyed the boots and Judge Waller ordered prosecutors to compile statements outlining how such vital evidence had gone missing.
While on the run, Cahill found work in a security capacity at an Australian airport, the court also heard, raising questions about the adequacy of security checks for airport employees.
Judge Waller said a warrant was issued in the UK for Cahill's arrest after he failed to appear in court on May 11, 2005.
Despite the warrant, Cahill, who is believed to hold British and Australian passports, obtained clearance to work in secure parts of an Australian airport until his recapture earlier this year.
Cahill is a former goalkeeper who played for Wollongong Wolves and at an amateur level in England.
magicgreg said:
Blind and nerve damage!!!
Hope he gets banged up for a very long time, what a moron!!
Hope he gets banged up for a very long time, what a moron!!
Honestly, don't think you can make that sort of comment. Do you know the full story. The dude made a racist comment and in typical pommy fashion only made the comment with all his mates around. Attack or be attacked ....hard call to make.
there are always two sides to a story - I'm sure he was provoked or may have been defending himself or somone else initially; sounds like he went too far though - kickin in the head is never going to win him any favours and puts the assualt at a whole diff level - equal to the many "CHAV" bashings or happy slappings that we sadly see too often over here.
"Pom" - "convict".... no diff IMO and both about as offensive as saying Geezuz when not singing in a church. I actually find it quite ironic how a lot of people in the UK use terms in everyday life that could easily be taken as racist by minority communities but the same people get all bent out of shape if someone says Pom, Soap Dodger or similar.
"Pom" - "convict".... no diff IMO and both about as offensive as saying Geezuz when not singing in a church. I actually find it quite ironic how a lot of people in the UK use terms in everyday life that could easily be taken as racist by minority communities but the same people get all bent out of shape if someone says Pom, Soap Dodger or similar.
Well, I don't know really.. it is pretty easy to kick someone in the head. What I know of sean it wouldn't not have definitely have been an unprovoked attack, he just didn't come across as that sort of bloke. You see it all the time from working in a pub, where one bloke will make the move, and then not knowing what is really going on, the others come into the fight. The gutless wonders wouldn't be man enough to do it by themselves.
Agreed, probably went too far, that bit is now pretty obvious. Underserved, well I would probably say not. If he was an innocent standerby, then yeah, I think the comments made above would be right, but would have to very strongly disagree if it was a provoked attack. You never know what is going to happen. What if the dude had a knife on him, are you going to give him the second chance to recover and possibly stab you? Then again, he might not have had a knife, but honestly are you going to give him the opportunity? Especially if you are possibly on your own with your Mrs, confronted by a bunch of the t
t's mates? Think about it very carefully. Some of these comments are based on, a bloke got one blind eye out of it, and that is all that it is based on.
Let me put the scenario this way, a similar view to which is being taken. A dude breaks into your house, you get your baseball bat (if you are in the states), and a soccer ball if you are in the UK, and you hit him until he is no longer a threat. The comments here would suggest that was a step too far. But honestly, and truthfully what are you going to do? Wait until the police turn up with their sticks? Let me broaden it slightly, and suggest, what happens if you know there are 4 other people in the house, who are all possible threats? You just gonna hit the dude once?
What annoys me most, is people's view. Everyone focused on the fact that a possible criminal ended up with a blind eye. OK, it isn't known yet who threw the first punch, but really, what I do know is that it was racially motivated. And siggy, you reacted exactly how most of the people would to a racist comment. That was a little bit of a test I put in. No offence meant at all mate, but it was done to show a point.
Agreed, probably went too far, that bit is now pretty obvious. Underserved, well I would probably say not. If he was an innocent standerby, then yeah, I think the comments made above would be right, but would have to very strongly disagree if it was a provoked attack. You never know what is going to happen. What if the dude had a knife on him, are you going to give him the second chance to recover and possibly stab you? Then again, he might not have had a knife, but honestly are you going to give him the opportunity? Especially if you are possibly on your own with your Mrs, confronted by a bunch of the t
t's mates? Think about it very carefully. Some of these comments are based on, a bloke got one blind eye out of it, and that is all that it is based on. Let me put the scenario this way, a similar view to which is being taken. A dude breaks into your house, you get your baseball bat (if you are in the states), and a soccer ball if you are in the UK, and you hit him until he is no longer a threat. The comments here would suggest that was a step too far. But honestly, and truthfully what are you going to do? Wait until the police turn up with their sticks? Let me broaden it slightly, and suggest, what happens if you know there are 4 other people in the house, who are all possible threats? You just gonna hit the dude once?
What annoys me most, is people's view. Everyone focused on the fact that a possible criminal ended up with a blind eye. OK, it isn't known yet who threw the first punch, but really, what I do know is that it was racially motivated. And siggy, you reacted exactly how most of the people would to a racist comment. That was a little bit of a test I put in. No offence meant at all mate, but it was done to show a point.
Grow up Raggyman and stop talking like some juvenile delinquent.
Regardless of the provocation, if you think its ok to kick a guy lying down on the floor, in the face, so hard you blind him then run away and hide in another country then I`m not sure you are the type of person I`d like to have a drink with.
Is this some type of idol worship on your part, why do you think that a car forum is the right place to post this?
Regardless of the provocation, if you think its ok to kick a guy lying down on the floor, in the face, so hard you blind him then run away and hide in another country then I`m not sure you are the type of person I`d like to have a drink with.
Is this some type of idol worship on your part, why do you think that a car forum is the right place to post this?
Gassing Station | HSV & Monaro | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff