Drunk businesswoman, 39, who glassed a pub drinker after he wrongly guessed she was 43 is spared jail after female judge says ‘one person’s banter may be insulting to others’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13335555/Drunk-businesswoman-glassed-pub-drinker-age-manchester.html
by suspended-sentence
28 comments
Having a not insignificant amount of experience of trials and sentencing, I can say that this would likely have been the same outcome if she was a man. The judge does make that comment but straight after she has said that it does not justify her actions and it doesn’t serve as a mitigating factor, the headline is more typical misleading shite from that rag.
Overall, this actually seems a very reasonable sentence given the circumstances. There are incompetents amongst the judiciary and there are times when they make bizarre, stupid or just downright wrong decisions, but this isn’t one of them.
Swap the genders and this has a very different ending, what a fuckkng joke!
He was only 3 years off? I can’t believe being offended by that. That was not “banter”, he guessed pretty much right.
The Mail quotes the judge as if the judge is saying
> “one person’s banter may be insulting to other people”
But the rest of the judge’s sentence is literally:
> but that did not justify what you then went on to do
Essentially the headline is a fucking lie.
Utter twaddle from the judge here, describes the injury as ‘grave’ which it presumably wasn’t otherwise she wouldn’t be getting a suspended sentence but then this judge also says that the she poses no threat to the public which seems odd for someone who’s first offence was to glass someone in the face.
I want to get into this interesting case but there’s no fucking real information I can find anywhere on it!
I went to the daily mail site. And basically nothing they write the hook piece and that’s it, you don’t know what the fuck actually happened or what the punishment is. Fucking new stations!
I’m glad you are all dying off!
Fuck off, fuck off, fuck off and die!
people complain about the lack of prison time, blaming the judge for something the Daily Heil has half quoted, [but the real reason is once again down to our zombie government…](https://news.sky.com/story/amp/prisons-set-to-be-full-by-easter-after-plans-to-release-offenders-up-to-two-months-early-revealed-13093208)
Well doesn’t she seem like a bit of an entitled cunt
Ok so violently attacking someone is ok so long as I’m offended, got it. /s
In todays news, physical assault is now legal in the UK.
She should have lost everything for that little stunt. It would have made a good example.
I hope at the very least her business goes up in smoke because people decide they don’t want their kid’s sleepover handled by a psycho. Otherwise there’s no way she will learn anything from this and will carry on drinking like a fish and doing fuck knows what to anyone in punching distance.
Very worrying trend for perpetrators to immediately assume the role of victim as well, leaving the person who actually paid the price for their choices being treated as though they don’t matter.
I’d be very interested to see what would happen if the victim decided to take his revenge by smashing an identical wine glass over her head later.
Does this set a precedent for using ‘one person’s banter may be insulting to others’ as a lawful defense?
Edit: Apparently the headline is misleading
>said she was suffering from ‘low self esteem’ at the time and said the banter was ‘disobliging’ towards her.
Diddums.
>Mr Cooper fled to the toilet in a bid to get away from the heated situation, but when he came out Dodd ran towards him and twice shoved her wine glass in his face.
>He was left with a four inch laceration to his face, narrowly missing his eye, and an injury to his thumb.
He was even trying to escape the situation before she intentionally glassed him.
What a miserable excuse for a person.
>Dodd was sentenced to 12 months in prison, suspended for 12 months and was ordered to complete 180 hours of unpaid work. She was also ordered to pay £800 in compensation to her victim.
Unbelievable decision by the judge. Should have been a custodial.
The judge is no doubt being asked a few hard questions by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, to which she has no doubt been referred by the injured party’s solicitors.
I wouldn’t blame someone for taking matters into their own hands after a sentencing like this.
Prisons are understaffed, crammed to the brim and seething with drugs so judges are being instructed to not send criminals to jail. Our country is coming apart at the seams
For the second time today let’s point out headline bullshit:
‘After’ does not mean the same as ‘because’.
That picture is generous. He probably thought he was being nice when he said 43
Honestly disgusting that this misogynistic behavior is tolerated. HE should have been jailed. Frankly a piss-take he got off so lighty… /s
So violence is an appropriate response to a perceived slight?
Daily reminder. Women get away with shit men only dream of.
A woke feminist judge lets women get away with violence against a man!! Other way round & the man goes to jail for sure!!
Going by her pics, I’m glad she didn’t ask him to guess her weight. Poor man wouldn’t be alive today.
“She runs a firm which organises children’s sleepover parties.” Fuck me.
Lovely to see this sub has just turned into posts of garbage non-articles from the Daily Mail. With a comment section to match.
The quote in the headline from the judge is just part of their summary, and they give a pretty run of the mill breakdown of why a custodial sentence isn’t appropriate. Apparently half the people here can’t get beyond the headline before working themselves into a froth over some bugbear of theirs though.
Disgusting , can you even imagine swapping the genders
How is coming within 10% of someone’s age on a guess ‘banter’?
Ah, so assault is ok as long as they’ve insulted me? I’ll remember that for next time