Prejudicial

[Timbuk2]

I don't understand the use of this word here.

A drunken teenager who launched a "murderous" unprovoked attack on a man in a Devon street for looking at him has been jailed for five years.

Steven Cloak, 26, from Bideford, had to have a quarter of his skull removed as surgeons tried to save his life.

His attacker, Jack Hobbs, who was 16, was convicted at Exeter Crown Court of inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Judge Philip Wassall said photos of Mr Cloak's injuries were too prejudicial to show the jury during Hobbs' trial.

Det Con Martin Pearse said: "This was a completely unprovoked and mindless act of violence which could easily and very nearly resulted in a death."

After the case, Mr Cloak's mother Margaret said her son was "doing well" but would "never completely recover".

Mr Cloak has now had a titanium plate inserted where the skull had to be removed.

The court heard Hobbs, who is now 17, had been drinking sambuca and beer when he attacked his victim claiming Mr Cloak had given him "an intimidating look".

Mr Cloak was punched to the ground and then repeatedly kicked in the head.

Hobbs, from Bideford, put his blood-stained trainers and clothes in the washing machine but forensic science experts still found traces of blood on his shoes.

Too prejudicial?!

Too prejudicial.

What?

I cannot reason with this.

How are the victim's injuries too prejudicial to be shown to the jury?

They're going to be unduly influenced by viewing this? When the perpetrator is on trial for perpetrating these very injuries.

Nope. Nonsensical.

[Wraith]

It makes sense to me. You show pictures of that type of thing to somebody, and they're going to think "That's horrible! Somebody should pay for this!" and when you're in a trial there's a somebody on offer right there. It can cause the trial to stop being about seeking justice and instead focus on vengeance. Facts become less important because damnit, somebody has to pay.

I wouldn't object to the severity of the injuries being taken into consideration once you get to the sentencing portion of a trial, but for the initial part I don't think anyone can get a fair trial if something like this is paraded in front of the jurors beforehand.

[rumrunner]

Exactly as wrath said. Justice is not served by showing people these pictures when they are deciding if the attack was provoked or not. The severity of the injuries has nothing to do with the justification, or lack thereof, for the attack. I do feel the victim in this case, and these pictures better damn well have been considered during the sentencing phase.

[Dreadnaught]

I generally agree, but where is the line between "demonstrates what happened" and "severity of injuries"? Certainly the severity of the injury is all that matters to this guy.

PS how the hell is he alive.

[Nessus]

Magnets!

[Dreadnaught]

Fucking magnets...how do they work?

[Nessus]

I will stab you now

With science