NationStates Jolt Archive

Now I am not usually one of the hang 'em and flog 'em brigade but this bloke is scum - is three years really long enough in prison?

Man jailed for urinating on woman

Anthony Anderson was filmed urinating
A man who urinated on a woman as she lay dying and shouted "this is YouTube material" has been sentenced to three years in prison.
Anthony Anderson also covered Christine Lakinski with shaving foam after she collapsed in a Hartlepool street.

The 50-year-old, who suffered from a number of medical conditions, was later pronounced dead at the scene.

Andrews, 27, and from Raby Road in the Teesside town, had earlier admitted outraging public decency.

The court heard how, on 27 July, Miss Lakinski was making her way home with a box of laminate flooring when she fell ill and stumbled into a doorway.

Totally shocked

Anderson, a former soldier, had smoked a cannabis joint and been drinking when he and two friends spotted her.

He tried to rouse her by throwing a bucket of water over her, before urinating on her and covering her with shaving foam.

A crowd had gathered around, watching and laughing, and the incident was filmed on a mobile phone.

She was later declared dead at the scene, the cause of death being given as pancreatic failure.


Christine Lakinski had "a difficult life"

Magistrates in Hartlepool had referred the case to Teesside Crown Court so a longer jail term could be handed out.

Judge Peter Fox, the recorder of Middlesbrough sitting at Teesside Crown Court, said: "You violated this woman in an incredible way, and the shocking nature of your acts over a prolonged period of time must mean that a prison sentence of greater length is appropriate in this case."

Outside court, Miss Lakinski's family said in a statement: "We remain totally shocked that anyone could behave in such an appalling way.

"The fact that Christine was dying makes this man's actions even more sick and inhumane.

"However, those who stood by and did nothing to stop Anderson are also guilty in our eyes.

"It beggars belief that these people chose not only to condone his cruelty, but also to walk away from a neighbour who was clearly in distress and needed help."

The family statement added that Christine had "faced immense challenges throughout her life", yet still had managed to "forge an independent life for herself".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7063366.stm

He's not a nice guy, but what more do you want? He didn't actually kill her.

What do you hope to achieve with a long jail sentence? He was drunk and high, wasn't the first (and won't be the last) to urinate on somebody he probably thought was a tramp.

He's a yob and an idiot. But all you achieve by being excessive is the satisfying of a basic animalistic hunger for revenge.

He's not a nice guy, but what more do you want? He didn't actually kill her.

This.

Also, yay for the reuturn some hours ago of Philosopy!

This.

Also, yay for the reuturn some hours ago of Philosopy!

*Raises eyebrow*

Well that's was something of a delayed reaction. :p

Besides, I never actually 'left', I've just been busy, so my posts have been confined to one or two every now and again. I have a day off today though, and boredom called, so it had to be NS to the rescue!

He's not a nice guy, but what more do you want? He didn't actually kill her.

He may not have killed her but he does not appear to have called an ambulance. I would have thought his behaviour could have contributed to her death.

He may not have killed her but he does not appear to have called an ambulance. I would have thought his behaviour could have contributed to her death.

She died of unrelated causes. Besides, the law doesn't impose a duty on people to act in such a situation; you can't go to prison for failing to call an ambulance.

*Raises eyebrow*

Well that's was something of a delayed reaction. :p
The doctor banged me on the knee a few weeks ago. I'm still waiting for my knee to twitch.

Besides, I never actually 'left', I've just been busy, so my posts have been confined to one or two every now and again. I have a day off today though, and boredom called, so it had to be NS to the rescue!

Not posting much is about the same as leaving.

He may not have killed her but he does not appear to have called an ambulance. I would have thought his behaviour could have contributed to her death.

And I wouldn't be surprised if that hadn't been taken into consideration by the court.
Humiliating someone without doing actual physical damage (which, when you get down to it, is what he did really) rarely gets you a prison sentence...

It's all funny until you're on the receiving end.

However, other than public decency laws, and possibly drug laws, I'm fuzzy on what UKs laws on cannabis are, he hasn't broken any other law.

It's all funny until you're on the receiving end.

I'm not sure anyone was suggesting that what he did was funny.

She died of unrelated causes. Besides, the law doesn't impose a duty on people to act in such a situation; you can't go to prison for failing to call an ambulance.

You can't in the UK?

*Cabra's turn to raise an eyebrow*

You do have a duty to help people in distress in most other European countries... it's the reason why the two French cops who failed to alert the electricity board that they had chased two teenagers into a transformator house are facing jail now. They didn't help, although they could have.

You can't in the UK?

*Cabra's turn to raise an eyebrow*

You do have a duty to help people in distress in most other European countries... it's the reason why the two French cops who failed to alert the electricity board that they had chased two teenagers into a transformator house are facing jail now. They didn't help, although they could have.

There would be a difference in a situation like that; a policeman, for example, would be under a public duty to act. You might also have a contractual duty to act (there's an old case of a level crossing keeper jailed for manslaughter for failing to shut the gates), or a parental duty, or a statutory duty.

But, outside of such specific duties, there is no general duty. It's meant to be a personal freedom thing; you can't force a person to get involved, especially when getting involved might make them liable for their actions in a way that they wouldn't have been had they stayed out of it (the have-a-go hero who jumps into the sea to rescue someone, for example, does more harm than good, and is then sued as a result).

And I wouldn't be surprised if that hadn't been taken into consideration by the court.
Humiliating someone without doing actual physical damage (which, when you get down to it, is what he did really) rarely gets you a prison sentence...

Which sorta begs the question, if the woman was dead before he started to piss on her can it said that she was humiliated?

There would be a difference in a situation like that; a policeman, for example, would be under a public duty to act. You might also have a contractual duty to act (there's an old case of a level crossing keeper jailed for manslaughter for failing to shut the gates), or a parental duty, or a statutory duty.

But, outside of such specific duties, there is no general duty. It's meant to be a personal freedom thing; you can't force a person to get involved, especially when getting involved might make them liable for their actions in a way that they wouldn't have been had they stayed out of it (the have-a-go hero who jumps into the sea to rescue someone, for example, does more harm than good, and is then sued as a result).

I was under the impression that if you begin to revive someone, by say giving the kiss of life, you then had to continue - if you stopped you would be liable to prosecution. Possibly me believing an urban myth - not really used to feeling outraged by something.

He may not have killed her but he does not appear to have called an ambulance. I would have thought his behaviour could have contributed to her death.
Then you better make room in jail for the rest of the crowd...

Which sorta begs the question, if the woman was dead before he started to piss on her can it said that she was humiliated?

She wasn't yet dead, only dying.

I was under the impression that if you begin to revive someone, by say giving the kiss of life, you then had to continue - if you stopped you would be liable to prosecution. Possibly me believing an urban myth - not really used to feeling outraged by something.

I would say that in such a situation you had assumed a duty, and so you might be liable if you stopped. If you never got involved though, you would never assume such liability.

If you're trying to say he should be done for murder because he chucked the water over her, however, you won't get anywhere - there is no link between the water and the death. She died of natural causes.

To be honest I am past my initial outrage, what I would hope would happen is that once he is released from prison he is treated as a social outcast by everybody in the area he lives.

Yes, it's offensive, but I doubt it qualifies for a 3-year sentence (or even a 1-year sentence).

He'll have to deal with the shunning and public disgust that the courts can't assign, however. When his term ends, the news shows will announce it, bringing up the original cause. It's a semi-celebrity, a chance to ruin someone's life, and certainly not REAL news, so mass coverage is virtually guaranteed!

There would be a difference in a situation like that; a policeman, for example, would be under a public duty to act. You might also have a contractual duty to act (there's an old case of a level crossing keeper jailed for manslaughter for failing to shut the gates), or a parental duty, or a statutory duty.

But, outside of such specific duties, there is no general duty. It's meant to be a personal freedom thing; you can't force a person to get involved, especially when getting involved might make them liable for their actions in a way that they wouldn't have been had they stayed out of it (the have-a-go hero who jumps into the sea to rescue someone, for example, does more harm than good, and is then sued as a result).

I remember a while back a thread about the two French policemen, and Adridia confirming that there is in fact such a civil duty in France, refered to as "non-assistance à personne en danger". The same concept exists in Germany, called "unterlassene Hilfeleistung".
I'm actually rather surprised that it doesn't exist in the UK?

Which sorta begs the question, if the woman was dead before he started to piss on her can it said that she was humiliated?

In that case, it would be desecration of a corspe. Illegal as well, I believe. :p

I remember a while back a thread about the two French policemen, and Adridia confirming that there is in fact such a civil duty in France, refered to as "non-assistance à personne en danger". The same concept exists in Germany, called "unterlassene Hilfeleistung".
I'm actually rather surprised that it doesn't exist in the UK?

lol, well it doesn't. I did know it exists in France, though.

lol, well it doesn't. I did know it exists in France, though.

Wasn't there a recent case where two Community Police Officers were criticised for not saving a boy drowning in a lake in a park? There was no legal requirement for them to do anything.

Wow, what an asshole. I would beat him up once he got out of prison.

Wasn't there a recent case where two Community Police Officers were criticised for not saving a boy drowning in a lake in a park? There was no legal requirement for them to do anything.

I heard of the case, but I don't really know the details. I think they said they didn't know where the child was, or something.

3 years is a bit much but i suppose if he gets "good time" he will be out in 18 months. that is about right for such creepy act.

any time that lands him in serious incarceration is good. i doubt he'll be considering pissing on the dying after he gets out.

3 years is a bit much but i suppose if he gets "good time" he will be out in 18 months. that is about right for such creepy act.

Actually, thanks to the Blair government, the halving of the sentence is automatic, unless he does 'bad time'.

I heard of the case, but I don't really know the details. I think they said they didn't know where the child was, or something.

They weren't trained to rescue a drowning person, if I recall correctly. And as the water was murky, they weren't sure where the boy was.

I really can't, much as I would like to, see any good reason for detaining him for any longer. Morally, the crime was abhorrent, but all he has actually done is exposed himself and public and peed on somebody. Quite a shame really, because I'd dearly love an excuse to hang the bastard.

...you would also hope that in the British military first aid training would give a slightly better idea of what to do to help someone than throw a bucket of water on them. Somehow conjures up an image of squaddies wandering around in Mesopotamia holding buckets of water to throw over fallen comrades...

...you would also hope that in the British military first aid training would give a slightly better idea of what to do to help someone than throw a bucket of water on them. Somehow conjures up an image of squaddies wandering around in Mesopotamia holding buckets of water to throw over fallen comrades...

Well he was high. Can't expect him to be at the top of his game.

Well he was high. Can't expect him to be at the top of his game.

Well if my knowledge of history is correct (gained entirely from Hollywood films and the back of matchboxes) the entire medivac teams flying helicopters in the Vietnam War were high on LSD, heroin, cannabis and the devil's music and they managed to do more than throw buckets of water...

I'm not sure anyone was suggesting that what he did was funny.

He certainly did.

Well he was high. Can't expect him to be at the top of his game.

That shouldn't bear any relevancy to his sentence, except aggravate it.


Though, I'm still quite at loss why was he sentenced in the first place if he tried to revive her and there's no negligence laws in Britain in the first place?

Who were the assholes standing around laughing at this? Why weren't people kicking this guy's teeth out?

This is something that, if it happened in my hometown, would incite radical violence from any adult male that witnessed it.