Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

A woman from Edmonton who assaulted a fellow passenger at Finsbury Park Tube station has been given a 12 month community order following a British Transport Police (BTP) investigation.

Maureen Daley (48), of Brierly Avenue, was sentenced at City of London Magistrates’ Court on Friday 2 July after earlier pleading guilty to common assault. She was also ordered to do 60 hours unpaid work, pay her victim £100 compensation and pay £175 court costs.

Daley became involved in an argument with a 28-year-old woman as they walked between the Piccadilly and Victoria line platforms just before 9am on Thursday 3 December.

Daley pushed her in the face and grabbed her hair causing scratches to her face and neck before BTP officers attended and separated the pair.

BTP PC Matthew Shepherd, investigating, said: “Daley’s actions were completely unacceptable and I hope the victim feels that justice has been served.

“Although violent behaviour such as this is uncommon on the Tube I hope this sentence sends out a clear message that it will not be tolerated when it does occur.”

Tags for Forum Posts: finsbury park, police, underground

Views: 157

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Way too lenient, she should have been made to pay more, and possibly look at a stretch in prison. Stupid chav.
Agree. The courts are IMO, too lenient on those who commit physical assault. For years, the Home Office advice to courts has been, in a nutshell, to do everything possible to avoid custodial sentences. Life hardly ever means life. In order to really get life, you have to be a Peter Sutcliffe. Nothing less is good (bad) enough.
On the other hand, you could read the report as it being nothing more than a scuffle. Without more details, I would tend to trust the Magistrates' judgement.
Anette. FYI: chav = Romany word for 'child'
Well, lets just consider the sentence issued. With a custodial sentence, there is some certainty that at least some of the term will be served. With fines, there is doubt. About 10 days ago there was a report that "Courts in England and Wales are owed £1,300,000,000 in unpaid fines, confiscation and compensation orders"

Crime is not a career move or a recommendation, but at present there seems not a great deal of sanction against it – or fear of punishment.
"Stupid chav" Hmmm...

James, yes absolutely right. Also agree with JohnD
Of course what this woman did was wrong, and the fine seems very low (perhaps reflecting something about the case we don't know about) - but prison?
Paulie in peace..

I fear we are losing sight of what happened here. According to the OP, the lady was not fined. She was given a community order for 12 months - probation, it used to be called - ordered in addition to do 60 hours' community service - that's around two weeks of unpaid work on my reckoning - ordered to pay compensation to the victim, and - finally - ordered to pay a surcharge to the court.

I am not expressing any opinion as to the appropriateness of the sentence but I thought it might be worth clarifying what the sentence actually seems to have been.
This woman Daley is no more a 'lady' than Peter Sutcliffe is a gentleman.

Once these community sentences are issued we hear little more about them. We can only hope that this apparently modest sentence is actually carried out in full. I'm glad the police were on the case.

I don't normally quote Conservative politicians approvingly, but I was always attracted to PM John Major's comment some years ago when he remarked:

"Society needs to condemn a little more and understand a little less'

OTOH, am disappointed with Home Secretary Ken Clarke's recent remarks about the cost of custodial sentences. I question the past emptying of mental hospitals and the current interest in, if not emptying prisons, at least reducing prison numbers (regardless of any other factor). These policies have nothing to do with morality and everything to do with saving money.

Protecting law-abiding citizens from harm is surely one of the most basic functions of any government.
Clive. You have stunned me with this comment. "Society needs to condemn a little more and understand a little less''.
What this means in essence: ''More judgement, less thought''.
James: all judgement needs thought, its not a dichotomy. I'm afraid I was one of those who were never really persuaded by Mr Blair's sound-bite that New Labour would be "tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime".

There's only so much toughness to go around and you can't really be tough on both. The latter clause did come across as a qualification to the former.

Given a choice, I'd settle for the former. I'm sure that lots of sociologists would like to understand more about crime and its causes, but most of the public would just rather have less of it.
clive. may i ask a personal question please ? (hope i don't get into trouble for this but i'm trying to make a serious point)
Have you ever in your life stolen something that didn't belong to you, ever, even when you were young ?

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service