Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat May 09, 2026 6:34 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57383
Location: 1066 Country
Top judge slams Nottingham taxi drivers who sat and watched train passenger attack

A top judge today quoted Shakespeare as he slammed the Nottingham taxi drivers who sat in their cars and did nothing while a public-spirited train passenger was savagely beaten by a young thug. Robert Steel annoyed hoodlum, Robert Elliot, 24, by touching him on the arm as he tried to persuade the younger man to pay his fare on a Newark-Nottingham train in May last year.

Infuriated by this perceived lack of "respect", Elliot stalked Mr Steel and his wife to the station taxi rank at Nottingham, where he and another man subjected Mr Steel to a vicious beating.

Today, three top judges at the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by Elliott against his two-and-a-half year sentence for causing actual bodily harm.

But, quoting from Shakespeare's Henry IV, Mr Justice Kenneth Parker also had harsh words for the taxi drivers who sat in their cars while the attack took place. "Very bravely, the victim's wife sought to ward off these two young male attackers from her stricken spouse," said the judge.

"In contrast, the heroic taxi drivers, who no doubt heeding the wise words of Falstaff, chose to a man - if that is the right word - discretion is the better part of valour and stayed safely in the comfort of their cabs as spectators of this savage spectacle."

The incident began when Elliot got onto the train at Lowdham with a friend. They had no ticket and were told to either pay up or get off.

Mr Steel went to help the train guard by persuading Elliot to pay so that everyone could get home, touching his arm as he did so. "This intervention offended his twisted concept of respect he thought was rightly due to someone of his status," said the judge.

At Nottingham, Mr and Mrs Steel realised they were being followed and were accosted when they reached the taxi rank. Elliot lunged at Mr Steel and burned him with a cigarette, before punching him and then, with his friend, kicking him while on the ground.

Mrs Steel grabbed the other man's bag and refused to hand it over when he demanded it back. Fingerprints on the bag helped police track the men down. Through his lawyers, Elliot complained today that his sentence was too long for the attack. He would feel "crushed" by such a long sentence, the judges were told.

Mr Justice Parker, sitting today with Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Jeremy Baker, rejected the appeal. "The only people who will have any legitimate cause for such an emotion are the victims of the appellant's criminal violence," he said.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 11:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 974
Location: london
To many innocent people have been killed by 'stepping in'.

_________________
stressed controller!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
rambo wrote:
To many innocent people have been killed by 'stepping in'.



and millions more have been executed by not

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 1:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
And many have ended up on the wrong side of the law for trying to help out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
depends what you mean by law I suppose

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 7:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
Sussex wrote:
Top judge slams Nottingham taxi drivers who sat and watched train passenger attack

A top judge today quoted Shakespeare as he slammed the Nottingham taxi drivers who sat in their cars and did nothing while a public-spirited train passenger was savagely beaten by a young thug. Robert Steel annoyed hoodlum, Robert Elliot, 24, by touching him on the arm as he tried to persuade the younger man to pay his fare on a Newark-Nottingham train in May last year.

Infuriated by this perceived lack of "respect", Elliot stalked Mr Steel and his wife to the station taxi rank at Nottingham, where he and another man subjected Mr Steel to a vicious beating.

Today, three top judges at the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by Elliott against his two-and-a-half year sentence for causing actual bodily harm.

But, quoting from Shakespeare's Henry IV, Mr Justice Kenneth Parker also had harsh words for the taxi drivers who sat in their cars while the attack took place. "Very bravely, the victim's wife sought to ward off these two young male attackers from her stricken spouse," said the judge.

"In contrast, the heroic taxi drivers, who no doubt heeding the wise words of Falstaff, chose to a man - if that is the right word - discretion is the better part of valour and stayed safely in the comfort of their cabs as spectators of this savage spectacle."

The incident began when Elliot got onto the train at Lowdham with a friend. They had no ticket and were told to either pay up or get off.

Mr Steel went to help the train guard by persuading Elliot to pay so that everyone could get home, touching his arm as he did so. "This intervention offended his twisted concept of respect he thought was rightly due to someone of his status," said the judge.

At Nottingham, Mr and Mrs Steel realised they were being followed and were accosted when they reached the taxi rank. Elliot lunged at Mr Steel and burned him with a cigarette, before punching him and then, with his friend, kicking him while on the ground.

Mrs Steel grabbed the other man's bag and refused to hand it over when he demanded it back. Fingerprints on the bag helped police track the men down. Through his lawyers, Elliot complained today that his sentence was too long for the attack. He would feel "crushed" by such a long sentence, the judges were told.

Mr Justice Parker, sitting today with Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Jeremy Baker, rejected the appeal. "The only people who will have any legitimate cause for such an emotion are the victims of the appellant's criminal violence," he said.



Sounds about right for the Nottingham lot. They'll be looking for their next £50 job to Ashfield.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57383
Location: 1066 Country
bloodnock wrote:
And many have ended up on the wrong side of the law for trying to help out.

If I could save a fella or lady from a good kicking then I would take my chances, especially if I had a lot of colleagues near by.

The judge was spot on.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
Sussex wrote:
bloodnock wrote:
And many have ended up on the wrong side of the law for trying to help out.

If I could save a fella or lady from a good kicking then I would take my chances, especially if I had a lot of colleagues near by.

The judge was spot on.



Done it before some years ago and I'd definitely do it again, even though I did get a dressing down off the coppers because I went to far.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:20 am
Posts: 2948
Location: Over here!
There are "Pros" and "Cons" to the argument/statement! The main problem being is that one wrong punch from the helper........................and you/I would be carted off to clink #-o

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
cabby john wrote:
There are "Pros" and "Cons" to the argument/statement! The main problem being is that one wrong punch from the helper........................and you/I would be carted off to clink #-o



My post above. #-o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57383
Location: 1066 Country
Nidge2 wrote:
cabby john wrote:
There are "Pros" and "Cons" to the argument/statement! The main problem being is that one wrong punch from the helper........................and you/I would be carted off to clink #-o



My post above. #-o

My advice is to claim self-defence at all times.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
Sussex wrote:
Nidge2 wrote:
cabby john wrote:
There are "Pros" and "Cons" to the argument/statement! The main problem being is that one wrong punch from the helper........................and you/I would be carted off to clink #-o



My post above. #-o

My advice is to claim self-defence at all times.

If you are intervening in a fight it would be hard to claim self defense.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57383
Location: 1066 Country
grandad wrote:
Sussex wrote:
My advice is to claim self-defence at all times.

If you are intervening in a fight it would be hard to claim self defense.

No, intervening to stop an incident getting worse is your civic duty, stopping someone punching you as you do it is self-defence.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 7:24 pm
Posts: 6755
Sussex wrote:
grandad wrote:
Sussex wrote:
My advice is to claim self-defence at all times.

If you are intervening in a fight it would be hard to claim self defense.

No, intervening to stop an incident getting worse is your civic duty, stopping someone punching you as you do it is self-defence.


Thats useful advice Sus =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

_________________
All posts by this contributor are made in a strictly personal capacity

I AM PROUD TO BE A CITIZEN NOBODY'S SUBJECT http://www.republic.org.u

F88K EM ALL WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND

BOOZE BOOZE BOOZE


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:20 am
Posts: 2948
Location: Over here!
Nidge2 wrote:
cabby john wrote:
There are "Pros" and "Cons" to the argument/statement! The main problem being is that one wrong punch from the helper........................and you/I would be carted off to clink #-o



My post above. #-o


There we are straight away - how far......is too far? I am saying one misguided punch/slap/throw etc etc could land you/I in clink.

In your post you said
Quote:
because I went to far.
The reply is not as stupid as you may have read.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 727 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group