head stomping

A

accyman

Town Elder
Tackler
so theres been an attack in ossy where the attacker after beating the man to the floor and assaulting his wife decided to jump on his victims head

Couple assaulted in Oswaldtwistle - Lancashire Constabulary

in my eyes jumping on someones head or kicking them in the head when they are on the floor is attempted murder not assault

or am i just old fashioned in thinking you dont stomp on peoples heads or hit people who can no longer defend themselves ?
 
I agree. When you stamp on someone's head you are most likely not wanting that person to survive and as such you should be charged with attempted murder.
Its becoming more and more common and it is absolutely abhorrent, i hope they catch the coward and he gets a serious sentence.
 
accyman said:
so theres been an attack in ossy where the attacker after beating the man to the floor and assaulting his wife decided to jump on his victims head

Couple assaulted in Oswaldtwistle - Lancashire Constabulary

in my eyes jumping on someones head or kicking them in the head when they are on the floor is attempted murder not assault

or am i just old fashioned in thinking you dont stomp on peoples heads or hit people who can no longer defend themselves ?
Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly with the last part ... but I don't think it qualifies as "attempted murder" ... altho' it certainly seems to be "aggravated assault", which over here can draw a sentence of up to 14 years in the pen. And it's probably much easier to get a conviction on an aggravated assault beef than it is on attempted murder.
 
Like most cases,each would be taken on its own merit,taking into account mitigating circumstances etc,I suppose you'd have to prove the intent kill.
 
Eric said:
Agree wholeheartedly with the last part ... but I don't think it qualifies as "attempted murder" ... altho' it certainly seems to be "aggravated assault", which over here can draw a sentence of up to 14 years in the pen. And it's probably much easier to get a conviction on an aggravated assault beef than it is on attempted murder.
Click to expand...

have to disagree and say that if your stamping on someones head you are intending on that person never getting up again.Even the less inteligent people know that stamping on someones head repeatedly is likely to kill them

it wasnt too long ago someone was killed in this fashion in accrington although i cant recall if they got charged with murder or not
 
Accyexplorer said:
I agree. When you stamp on someone's head you are most likely not wanting that person to survive and as such you should be charged with attempted murder.
Its becoming more and more common and it is absolutely abhorrent, i hope they catch the coward and he gets a serious sentence.
Click to expand...

Same applies to the guy in Rishton who attacked 2 men with a wooden mallet. Hard to think that killing them wasn't his motive.

Two injured in Great Harwood pub attack with mallet (From Lancashire Telegraph)
 
Sounds like a total psychopath, what an evil cretin. These attacks are becoming more frequent, I dare say drink or drugs or both were probably involved too. I worry when my (grown up) kids go for a night out in case they're attacked by some scumbag. Violence is definitely on the up and I don't think a few months in prison is much of a deterrent to the scummy half wits.
 
I went to school in the 1940s-1950s when it was usual for fathers in our neighbourhood to tell their little lads that they had to abide by the Queensbury Rules and that boys didn't hit girls and girls shouldn't hit boys because the boys couldn't fight back. The message was repeated by our teachers and a generation later Bryan was repeating the message to our offspring.

The difference between those days and later decades is that the violence my generation experienced was real bombs dropping from above as opposed to later generations who might be inculcated to violent acts through handheld games and films. I also believe chemicals in modern food could be a cause because I'm certain my generation weren't as loud and as excitable.
 
Well for a kick off we didn't get the same fizzy drinks or sweets.
If we got sweets it was a real treat. Even at Christmas we didn't get chocolate. Our selection boxes consisted of liquorice ropes, pinwheels, pipes....and something that looked like a pan pipe but had coloured confits stuck in the tops.
 
Lucysgirl said:
I went to school in the 1940s-1950s when it was usual for fathers in our neighbourhood to tell their little lads that they had to abide by the Queensbury Rules and that boys didn't hit girls and girls shouldn't hit boys because the boys couldn't fight back. The message was repeated by our teachers and a generation later Bryan was repeating the message to our offspring.

The difference between those days and later decades is that the violence my generation experienced was real bombs dropping from above as opposed to later generations who might be inculcated to violent acts through handheld games and films. I also believe chemicals in modern food could be a cause because I'm certain my generation weren't as loud and as excitable.
Click to expand...

Couldn't it also to have a great deal to do with parental guidance through the generations since the '40s & '50s? - which incidentally were also my formative years
 
Yes, parental guidance has a lot to do with it.
We seem to have fallen into the trap of becoming soft parents.....those who want to be their child's best friend.
You can only be your child's best friend once your child turns 40.
My parents were strict with us.....we were under their roof and they made the rules.....if we did not like their rules we were free to go and live with our friends parents(who always seemed far more lenient).
I was strict with my daughter.....my husband less so, and we had many heated discussions about the rights and wrongs of parenting.
My daughter now has two children of her own.
Whose rules do you think she has adopted?
Children need boundaries to push.......but they need to know that the boundaries are for their benefit.
 
Margaret Pilkington said:
If I knew what Spanish jink was Eric.......
Click to expand...

It cropped up in my memory ... tried to google it; but all I got was that in some areas of England, liquorice was called "spanish." Do you remember those hard sticks of black spanish? If you put some of it in water and shook it ... and shook it .... and shook it ... you got a mess I remember being called "spanish jink" ... it's a vague memory. And I would like to know if anyone else remembers it ... or making it.
 
Yes, I remember it well, but it was just called Spanish water.......it could only be made with the ha'penny hard Spanish....not liquorice.
It was what sustained us (along with a penny hovis loaf) for all our day long adventures.
 
Margaret Pilkington said:
Yes, I remember it well, but it was just called Spanish water.......it could only be made with the ha'penny hard Spanish....not liquorice.
It was what sustained us (along with a penny hovis loaf) for all our day long adventures.
Click to expand...

For some reason "spanish jink" is part of my memory ... we were living on Queen Street ... number 29, I think ... and all the kids called it that. And, of course, I know it was the hard stuff (I'm having a slurp right now;)) ... I'm not daft enough to think it was the other kind ... and who would waste pomfret cakes?:D If memory serves ... and it doesn't always ... were not candies on the sugar coupon.:confused:

Oh, and I'm metaphorically stomping my memory for all this stuff ... there; that keeps us more or less on topic.:D
 
I can't recall sweets being on ration when I was little......we still didn't get them though.
There were other things that the money went on(penny hovis and a ha'penny Spanish).
I only remember it being Spanish water.....it was always made up in a glass medicine bottle, with a cork in the top.......and we never ever hit anyone over the head with the bottle(to stay on topic).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top