Steven Gerrard Could Face a Five Year Prison Sentence If Guilty of Assault and Affray?



Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008

by
Temple Court Chambers

Let's start with a few definitions to get us started. Assault is when a person commits a crime of violence against another person. Common assault is committed when a person causes another person to fear that force is about to be used that may cause some physical injury. If the physical contact is an everyday social behavior such as a handshake or a pat on the back then this will generally not be an assault.

A battery is when the threatened force actually causes physical harm to the other person and this was intended or causes recklessly. A battery and a common assault are called summary offences as they can only be tried in the magistrates' court unless they have a degree of racial aggravation attached to it, and, usually attract either a fine or 6 months prison sentence.

Actually bodily harm is an offence of aggravated assault it occurs when a person inflicts substantial harm on the other. The other person has to have fear that a battery is about to occur and there has to be some physical injury (can be psychiatric) on the other person that is not transient. This could be a person cutting a large chunk of a women's hair off without her consent.

Grievous bodily harm occurs when a person has the intention to cause substantial harm to the other person and this harm does occur. So the other person not only has to fear that the other person is about to cause substantial harm but the person who inflicts it has to want to inflict the result that ensues. An example being that a person intending to cause serious injury to another person carries out this specific intent by smashing a glass bottle on the victims head those results in the victim being seriously hurt. What distinguishes a being an ABH or GBH is dependent upon the level of harm intended by the person. Was the attack planned or pre meditated, the use of threats prior to the attack, the breaking of the glass bottle before the attack and so on?

The sentence the ABH and GBH attract are up to five years in prison. They are both triable either way, which means that they can be tried in the magistrate's court or the crown court. Ultimately where the case will be tried will be dependent upon the person being tried as to which court they would like the case heard in and also the judge.

A long term prison sentence would be a sentence of five years. What is important is that the sentence is dependent upon a number of key factors.

Example the persons age, was the person aware of what he did? Was he easily led by others? Whether the person has any previous convictions? If not, this can be a strong mitigating factor as the person has behaved unusually or out of character. Does the person work? Shows that he/she is responsible. Where there any mitigating factors that led to the incident, was there a history between the convicted person and the victim. Was the person provoked by the victim? Has the person shown remorse?

All of the above as well as an assessment made by a probation officer who writes a report on the person convicted will be taken into account by the judge when a sentence is passed.

Now, lets us be less gullible to the tabloid headlines "Gerrard faces 5 years in jail for a GBH".

As for the affray there needs to be at least two people that threatened the use of unlawful violence to another person, and, a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene was in fear that violence will be used. The person of reasonable firmness need not be present at the scene and it can happen in a public and private place. The key is the threat would have made a person fear for his/her personal safety. This offence can also be tried either way and usually attracts 3 years prison or a fine or both. Only acts of sever violence would attract higher sentence.

First of all we do not know if he will be convicted, what evidence the crown prosecution service have to prove this, whether a jury will find that Gerrard is guilty as alleged by the CPS, in terms of sentence the judge will have the opportunity to take into account the background or circumstances to the offence, and, what mitigating factors the defence stated before a sentence is passed. The fact that Gerrard has no previous convictions will also carry a great amount of weight which no doubt his counsel will argue if the case goes to court  to assist his client.

Future, do not believe everything you read in the papers, if you want to change something this year, become more aware of the facts and beware of headlines you read that may not be wholly accurate. A number of factors are taken into account before a person is convicted and when passing a sentence on a convicted person after a criminal trial. So all those Liverpool fans, watch this space, and do not despair!

Meera Yagnik
COPYRIGHT
Meera Yagnik completed her pupillage at 5 St Andrews Hill Chambers of Simon Draycott QC, London. Meera is presently a barrister (Door Tenant)  at Temple Court Chambers specializing in all commercial and employment law related matters.She has extensive litigation experience before the Commercial Courts,Employment Tribunal and Appeal Tribunal. She also lectures on a part time basis for the ICSA Corporate Secretaryship qualification.She has also provided lectures at solicitors offices on Corporate Governance under the Companies Act 2006 and Employment matters. Meera has also provided advice and assistance  to various insurance, local authorities and solicitors firms on Employment, Human Resources and Commercial matters.
This Article has been viewed 1,036 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.