Home
The victim has since started driving to work and has fears over his safety

Portsmouth Crown Court has heard how 19-year-old Jack Andrews blocked a cyclist’s path with a stolen car before getting out and kicking him, breaking the off-duty paramedic’s bike and finger. The unprovoked attack was described as ‘indefensible’ even by the man tasked with defending him.

The Portsmouth News reports how Andrews had taken a Nissan Juke from Beehive Walk, Old Portsmouth, which he then used to block the path of a cyclist who was on his way home. The attack took place in Fratton Road at around 12.20am on January 14.

Prosecutor Adrian Fleming said the victim has since started driving to work and has fears over his safety. “Nothing like this had happened to him before, it was an unprovoked attack. He was not looking for trouble.”

Nick Tucker, defending Andrews – as well as his 26-year-old brother, Daniel Nicholson, who was also in the car – described the attack as ‘disgraceful’ and ‘most unpleasant and indefensible’.

Following the incident, Andrews deliberately rammed two taxis as he tried to escape.

Judge Ian Pearson described Andrews as a prolific offender and said there were 13 offences for which he would be sentenced, including a string of burglaries.

Of the attack on the cyclist, he said: “The victim, a cyclist, going home minding his own business, was a vulnerable victim, there was a sustained attack on him. He had significant injuries and his role as a paramedic meant he was off work.”

Andrews pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicle taking, criminal damage, using a vehicle without insurance and grievous bodily harm and was jailed for three years.

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

5 comments

Avatar
monty dog [464 posts] 2 years ago
1 like

Should've got double-tarriff  for oxygen thievery too...

Avatar
flathunt [245 posts] 2 years ago
4 likes

So 13 offences, 13 joke sentences, all to run concurrently, minus time served on remand, automatic early release etc means we probably owe him a few weeks JSA and a new PS4, poor love.

Avatar
Rouboy [93 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Another quality sentence, good job we have the best justice system in the world..... NOT!!!!!!

Avatar
oozaveared [937 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Airzound wrote:

Scum such as Andrews should swing from the end of a rope and then fed to the fish. The judge should be dismissed for giving such an inadequately lenient sentence.

 

Ok just so you know.  Judges don't invent the sentences.  They are set down.   The judge can't just decide to do something particularly different in either direction.  He/she has to use the sentencing guidelines.  Sum up the facts of the case against those guidlines and then set out the sentence according to the guidelines.  

The people you have a gripe with are the MPs.  

Since I have been watching the Rugger I could make the analogy that the ref should give a penalty for "coming in at the side" of a ruck. What he can't do is award 6 points for the penalty goal.  

Courts work the same way.  

Avatar
oozaveared [937 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Airzound wrote:

Scum such as Andrews should swing from the end of a rope and then fed to the fish. The judge should be dismissed for giving such an inadequately lenient sentence.

 

Ok just so you know.  Judges don't invent the sentences.  They are set down.   The judge can't just decide to do something particularly different in either direction.  He/she has to use the sentencing guidelines.  Sum up the facts of the case against those guidlines and then set out the sentence according to the guidelines.  

The people you have a gripe with are the MPs.  

Since I have been watching the Rugger I could make the analogy that the ref should give a penalty for "coming in at the side" of a ruck. What he can't do is award 6 points for the penalty goal.  

Courts work the same way.