What sentence would someone who doesnt have any previous convictions get?

Question

Victim says he was asked for his belongings. The accused who had just turned 18 years didnt ask for his belongings but 'what his problem was'. Accused has never been in trouble with police before, goes to uni, works part time, stuck to the bail conditions and answered all questions that the police put towards him. The barrister instructed the accused to plead guilty even though her didnt do what he was accused of instead of going to trial. 'Victim ' says that a knife was pulled out. The judge has implied that he may go down for 4 years. Does anyone know what the accused may face? Should he have gone to trial? I will add additional info if needed. Thanks

Answer 1

Pleading guilty to any charge (even reduced) opens one to the full penalties of the crime to which they pled guilty.

Persons who "cop a plea" to lesser charges are seen as though they WERE guilty of the immediate charge and usually are given the maximum sentence for their plea to the lesser charge.

Answer 2

Your not very clear but the barrister has privellaged information and if the accused goes to court and pleads not guilty for a crime that evidence shows the accused commited then the sentence is likely to be heavier if the accused pleads not guilty and is then found guilty.

If a weapon is involved then it is unlikely he will get off with a suspended sentence, community service or anything minor because to use a weapon means that person is likely to be a danger to the public.

Everyone is entitled to plead not guilty and if the accused feels he did not commit this crime then it is up to the accused to want a fair trial in a court of law and let the jury decide

Its based on the evidence and in a criminal court of law it states that it has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

It is down to your friend to decide what he wants to do and he doesnt have to listen to the barristers advice but if he is guilty and knows it then the evidence will go against him in a court of law.

Answer 3

can the defence prove a knife was pulled out?..even though the accused has never been in trouble...in a court of law..when a weapon "alledgley" has been used or brandished..i think the court would take this seriously...what are the implications if the accused does not plead guilty...would it be worth thier while to say guilty and have that charge against them....i do not know where you are from or what your laws have...

Answer 4

Not having a previous record does not imply a suspended sentance. It all comes down to how the Judge regards the offense and the accused. In the Court room he is God!

Answer 5

It's impossible to say not knowing all the facts - it you have been advised by the judge that he may go down for 4 years I would say that is the closest you will get to knowing before judgement is passed.

Do note the accused cannot be sent down without proven evidence against him so if they have DNA and finger prints I would advise the accused do as is advised to do.

Answer 6

the baraster just wants an easy earner if he not guilty then he must plead not guilty better to stand up for whats right than be convicted on a guilty plea if the barraster trys to bully him into the guilty plea because he a young frightened boy then someone must advised him to sack the barrister and employ another on the advice of his solicitor truth will out and he must be allowed his day in court to give an account of himself
good luck with this i hate injustice

Answer 7

Did the accused present a knife?

Answer 8

Some questions.

Is the offence in England?

What, precisely, is the charge or count(s).

Nobody can answer your question without this information.

Answer 9

if accussed was in possession of blade and pulled it looking at between 1 and 5.

Answer 10

PROBABLY A 1YR SUSPENDED SENTENCE ON PROBATION AND SOME COMMUNITY WORKS OF 30 HRS