A man was jailed for six years for brutally attacking and robbing a cyclist in Berkshire.
Neil Robinson knocked his 40-year-old victim off his bike on London Road in Newbury, before kicking him repeatedly in the face and body, fracturing his eye socket and breaking his nose and both cheekbones.
He then stole the man’s bike, keys and £300 cash, leaving him bleeding heavily on the ground.
Pensioner convicted of assaulting cyclist gets driving licence back on appeal
The attack happened on 28 August 2015 between 9.30pm and midnight on the A4. The victim was taken to the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford for treatment.
Following a Thames Valley Police investigation Robinson pleaded guilty to one count of robbery and assault at Reading Crown Court on Monday, and was sentenced to six years in prison.
Investigating officer, PC Claire Midwinter from Local CID at Newbury police station, said: “This was a nasty unprovoked attack where the victim was left in a bush, bleeding heavily, when the offender rode away on the stolen bike.
“The sentence reflects well on the severity of the crime committed and I am very happy with the outcome of the case and so is the victim.”
16 thoughts on “Man jailed for six years after brutal attack on cyclist”
Waste of money keeping him
Waste of money keeping him jailed for 6 years.
Lobotomy and let the thing play in traffic.
unconstituted wrote:
If only he would serve 6 years. Normal practice is to release them at the halfway point which, I am told, is largely to free up space in our prisons.
mike the bike wrote:
You only serve half the sentence and become eligible for parole if the sentence is between 1 to 4 years. Becoming eligible does not mean automatic release on licence. Lots of things come into play.
He got 6 years. He may well have spent time on remand. This could be deducted from his sentence if the judge agrees. It doesn’t always happen.
At some point the scumbag will become eligible for parole and he has to apply for it. He can be knocked back. I’m not sure how the parole eligibility date is worked out, I cba to research it.
I reckon he will do 4 years. Still an appalling sentence though and despite what the detective said to the media I bet she was really disappointed with that sentence.
Bring back hanging.
Bring back hanging.
Ramuz wrote:
For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.
Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”— Albert Camus
zanf wrote:
For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.
Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”— Albert Camus— Ramuz
An old fallacy of course. The equivalent to torture and death is torture and death. Or varying infinite degrees.
zanf wrote:
For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.
Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”— Albert Camus— Ramuz
An old fallacy of course. The equivalent to torture and death is torture and death. Or varying infinite degrees.
zanf wrote:
For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months.
Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”— Albert Camus— Ramuz
Nice quote but as the first poster is advocating a death sentence for a brutal but not fatal attack, I doubt he’d be swayed by the musings of a French philosopher on the nuances of equivalence in punishment.
Guy is a thug, and one can only hope he sees the error of his ways during his incarceration, however long it turns out to be.
Dr_Lex wrote:
Nice quote but as the first poster is advocating a death sentence for a brutal but not fatal attack, I doubt he’d be swayed by the musings of a French philosopher on the nuances of equivalence in punishment.
Guy is a thug, and one can only hope he sees the error of his ways during his incarceration, however long it turns out to be.— Ramuz
Quite right, I wasn’t swayed when studying jurisprudence because it was a fallacy then and still is today.
There are far more convincing reasons to be against the death penalty of course, and I am against it.
Doesn’t mean I can’t make posts suggesting colourful ways to dispose of people I don’t like.
Nuance, and all. You’re into that right.
This f*cktard has heavy Karma
This f*cktard has heavy Karma to pay back.
Utter scum.
Utter scum.
But I hope – for the rest of our sakes – that he gets help to deal with his psycopathic behaviour. Won’t be so long before he’s out.
The more worrying thing is
The more worrying thing is that he’ll be out in three years and in all likelihood an even worse human being.
Fool! He could have reversed
Fool! He could have reversed over him and done the same amount of damage and got knighted instead!
Blimey, the Crazy Frog has
Blimey, the Crazy Frog has really let himself go. And turned to crime. And been beaten by the ugly stick. And lost his dress sense.
No comments expressing
No comments expressing sympathy for him? He’s quite a slender looking guy so can’t see him fairing well when they come for his arse.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/17/there-s-no-ignoring-new-prison-rape-statistics.html
Bloody idiot, should have
Bloody idiot, should have used a car!