Prison sentence for a smoke bomb?

[YellowHoods]

Sentence now appealed to 100 hours community service plus three year ban. Not sure how they handle time already served in prison.

So these appear to be the facts

1. Chap concerned did not bring the smoke bomb into the ground, but rather stupidly took it off someone else
2. It was not set off, and there is no proof that it was intended to be
3. Chap concerned had no previous police record
4. He did, however, upset the stewards by being &quotdifficult&quot when questionned about the smoke bomb
5. He received crap legal advice by admitting to having an offensive weapon
6. The judge seemed to not know the difference between a smoke bomb and an H-bomb, commenting that &quotheaven knows what might have happened had it gone off.&quot

Overall, a bit of a miscarriage of justice, I would say. Still, he was only a football fan, so who cares?

According to the person claiming to be his brother on Yellows forum, you point 3 is not correct.

Correct. No football &quotprevious&quot, but was jailed for car crime 15 years ago. The point I was (trying to) make was that he's no hooligan hell bent on trouble. He attended most OUFC matches so the ban will hit him hard.

[Kernow Yellow]

This appeal result asks more questions than it answers. If I understand correctly, this guy had already served 75% of his sentence, and now he has to do 100 hours community service as well? Can this be right?

Even the new sentence seems a bit harsh for the crime of not letting off a smoke bomb, to be honest.

[GodalmingYellow]

Sentence now appealed to 100 hours community service plus three year ban. Not sure how they handle time already served in prison.

So these appear to be the facts

1. Chap concerned did not bring the smoke bomb into the ground, but rather stupidly took it off someone else
2. It was not set off, and there is no proof that it was intended to be
3. Chap concerned had no previous police record
4. He did, however, upset the stewards by being &quotdifficult&quot when questionned about the smoke bomb
5. He received crap legal advice by admitting to having an offensive weapon
6. The judge seemed to not know the difference between a smoke bomb and an H-bomb, commenting that &quotheaven knows what might have happened had it gone off.&quot

Overall, a bit of a miscarriage of justice, I would say. Still, he was only a football fan, so who cares?

According to the person claiming to be his brother on Yellows forum, you point 3 is not correct.

Correct. No football &quotprevious&quot, but was jailed for car crime 15 years ago. The point I was (trying to) make was that he's no hooligan hell bent on trouble. He attended most OUFC matches so the ban will hit him hard.

Indeed, but it was also creating a false impression to say he had no previous police record.

As with many legal cases, the detail is much more complicated than was originally presented by the press.

In my view from everything I've read, the sentence was way too harsh and it is debateable if the chap should even have been prosecuted. If anything a short community sentence would have been more than adequate, and I am generally the sort of person who thinks sentences are far too light and easy in this country. The legal advice that has been reported doesn't seem sensible, nor does the lad concerned for taking (hold of) the smoke bomb in the first place.

I also agree with Kernow that to serve 75% of the sentence and then have the rest converted to such a long community sentence seems to almost double the blow.

[YellowHoods]

Indeed, but it was also creating a false impression to say he had no previous police record.

As with many legal cases, the detail is much more complicated than was originally presented by the press.

In my view from everything I've read, the sentence was way too harsh and it is debateable if the chap should even have been prosecuted. If anything a short community sentence would have been more than adequate, and I am generally the sort of person who thinks sentences are far too light and easy in this country. The legal advice that has been reported doesn't seem sensible, nor does the lad concerned for taking (hold of) the smoke bomb in the first place.

I also agree with Kernow that to serve 75% of the sentence and then have the rest converted to such a long community sentence seems to almost double the blow.

Quite. But it's interesting than one or two (probably one, actually) posters on Yellows are twisting the fact that he has a non-football related record to suggest he somehow &quotdeserved&quot everything he got. &quotNo smoke without fire&quot is good enough for them (him).

[Kernow Yellow]

Sorry to drag this up again, but just thought I'd remind people of it in light of the very similar punishment handed down to the Leeds fan who invaded the pitch and attacked Chris Kirkland on Friday, despite the fact that he had a number of previous football banning orders.