Newport drug user jailed for attacking his grandmother

A MAN high on drugs who beat up his frail grandmother twice in three days, leaving her in hospital, has been jailed.

Scott Parker punched 79-year-old Theresa Wall in the face on New Year’s Day while on Valium, then kicked her in the ribs on January 4 during a row over a mobile phone charger, a court heard.

Parker, 33, grabbed a phone from her hand as she tried to call police on January 4 and told her: “I’ll be so glad when you are six-foot under”, Newport Crown Court heard.

Parker was in his own words “off his head” having swallowed up to 30 valium tablets before the first attack and up to 20 in the lead-up to the second assault, prosecutor Jason Howells said.

Mrs Wall was left with a one-inch wound on her chest, a lump on her face and grazed arms in the wake of the “shameful” attacks at her home in Maesglas Road, Newport. The wheelchair user had to stay at Royal Gwent Hospital following the second attack and has been confined to sitting or lying on her bed, Mr Howells told the court.

The “frail” and “vulnerable” woman had put him up at her home to help him with his substance misuse problems, the court was told. Parker had used heroin, cannabis and valium and was also prescribed the substitute drug methadone, the court heard.

His grandmother was one of the people who had tried to bring him up together with his grandfather, Mr Howells said. Parker punched Mrs Wall on New Year’s Day then attacked again her after she momentarily refused to let him get his phone charger on January 4.

He pleaded guilty to one count of common assault on January 1 as well as one count of wounding and a further charge of criminal damage on January 4. Judge Robert Craven gave him 28 months for the January 4 attack, a further two months for the New Year’s Day assault and no separate penalty for the criminal damage, totalling 30 months.

His barrister, Ben Waters, said the attacks were “deplorable” and “shameful” behaviour but stressed that he had been remorseful for his actions.

Mr Waters added that his client was now off methadone and attends an anger management course. and was seeking to address his behaviour through an anger management course

Judge Craven also imposed a restraining order preventing him from contacting his grandmother or going near her home until a further order is imposed and ordered him to pay a £120 victim surcharge.

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:04am Thu 27 Feb 14

Woodgnome says...

Oh - remorseful was he? He must make his family truly miserable.
Oh - remorseful was he? He must make his family truly miserable. Woodgnome
  • Score: 20

8:06am Thu 27 Feb 14

Llanmartinangel says...

Woodgnome wrote:
Oh - remorseful was he? He must make his family truly miserable.
Yeah there's that 'remorseful' word again. Tripe.
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: Oh - remorseful was he? He must make his family truly miserable.[/p][/quote]Yeah there's that 'remorseful' word again. Tripe. Llanmartinangel
  • Score: 20

8:22am Thu 27 Feb 14

Dai Rear says...

The only way the January 1 offence could have got to Crown in the first place must have been because it was charged as an ABH. But a plea has been accepted to a very minor offence-of punching in the face a 79 year old lady who needs a wheelchair. Did the CPS SERIOUSLY believe a jury wouldn't have convicted him? The punch is bound to have left a visible element of actual bodily harm, all that is needed for the offence. CPS-your charging standards are not the law. The 1861 Act is the law.
Had the charge remained at ABH the sentence could have been appropriate.
Apart from consuming stupefiants did this thing do anything in the way of work?
The only way the January 1 offence could have got to Crown in the first place must have been because it was charged as an ABH. But a plea has been accepted to a very minor offence-of punching in the face a 79 year old lady who needs a wheelchair. Did the CPS SERIOUSLY believe a jury wouldn't have convicted him? The punch is bound to have left a visible element of actual bodily harm, all that is needed for the offence. CPS-your charging standards are not the law. The 1861 Act is the law. Had the charge remained at ABH the sentence could have been appropriate. Apart from consuming stupefiants did this thing do anything in the way of work? Dai Rear
  • Score: 25

8:29am Thu 27 Feb 14

Llanmartinangel says...

Dai Rear wrote:
The only way the January 1 offence could have got to Crown in the first place must have been because it was charged as an ABH. But a plea has been accepted to a very minor offence-of punching in the face a 79 year old lady who needs a wheelchair. Did the CPS SERIOUSLY believe a jury wouldn't have convicted him? The punch is bound to have left a visible element of actual bodily harm, all that is needed for the offence. CPS-your charging standards are not the law. The 1861 Act is the law.
Had the charge remained at ABH the sentence could have been appropriate.
Apart from consuming stupefiants did this thing do anything in the way of work?
This is the same CPS that felt there was sufficient evidence to charge Bill Roache and wreck his life even though the testimony of most of his accusers would have fallen apart at even rudimentary police investigation. They are a joke.
http://www.theguardi
an.com/uk-news/2014/
feb/06/william-roach
e-acquittal-inconsis
tent-testimonies
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: The only way the January 1 offence could have got to Crown in the first place must have been because it was charged as an ABH. But a plea has been accepted to a very minor offence-of punching in the face a 79 year old lady who needs a wheelchair. Did the CPS SERIOUSLY believe a jury wouldn't have convicted him? The punch is bound to have left a visible element of actual bodily harm, all that is needed for the offence. CPS-your charging standards are not the law. The 1861 Act is the law. Had the charge remained at ABH the sentence could have been appropriate. Apart from consuming stupefiants did this thing do anything in the way of work?[/p][/quote]This is the same CPS that felt there was sufficient evidence to charge Bill Roache and wreck his life even though the testimony of most of his accusers would have fallen apart at even rudimentary police investigation. They are a joke. http://www.theguardi an.com/uk-news/2014/ feb/06/william-roach e-acquittal-inconsis tent-testimonies Llanmartinangel
  • Score: 6

9:18am Thu 27 Feb 14

Dai Rear says...

True Llanmartinangel. CPS is highly politicised and terrified of The League of Strident Wimmin. Hence Roache, Travis, etc etc. Poor old lady in a wheelchair is not a member of that League so doesn't show up on the CPS radar. Harman was a member of the League-but is she now, or will she be resigning as Deputy Leader next month to spend more time with friends in the West Hampstead Miners' Welfare? She's had Miliband's undying support, so I guess she's doomed.
True Llanmartinangel. CPS is highly politicised and terrified of The League of Strident Wimmin. Hence Roache, Travis, etc etc. Poor old lady in a wheelchair is not a member of that League so doesn't show up on the CPS radar. Harman was a member of the League-but is she now, or will she be resigning as Deputy Leader next month to spend more time with friends in the West Hampstead Miners' Welfare? She's had Miliband's undying support, so I guess she's doomed. Dai Rear
  • Score: 6

11:34am Thu 27 Feb 14

biker1 says...

Yet again the cps have pulled one out of the bag. 30 months for beating an elderly woman, it's pathetic and a fine example of what is wrong with this country.
I don't know how a cps lawyer can sleep at night.
Yet again the cps have pulled one out of the bag. 30 months for beating an elderly woman, it's pathetic and a fine example of what is wrong with this country. I don't know how a cps lawyer can sleep at night. biker1
  • Score: 9

2:19pm Thu 27 Feb 14

russ angel says...

Pathetic,the UK legal system strikes again.
Pathetic,the UK legal system strikes again. russ angel
  • Score: 3

3:47pm Thu 27 Feb 14

nodnyl says...

SCUM! thats all
SCUM! thats all nodnyl
  • Score: 3

5:58pm Thu 27 Feb 14

welshmen says...

10 lashes with the Birch every month he's inside would help his addiction....
10 lashes with the Birch every month he's inside would help his addiction.... welshmen
  • Score: 7

7:36pm Thu 27 Feb 14

paddlesnap says...

What I wouldn't give to beat the pathetic coward senseless. How can you do that to someone so defenceless?
What I wouldn't give to beat the pathetic coward senseless. How can you do that to someone so defenceless? paddlesnap
  • Score: 5

8:17pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Whyme? says...

Dia Rear, you are mistaken about the Jan 1st offence having to start as an ABH before being reduced to a common assault for it to be in the Crown Court. Where a common assault is linked to an offence which is indictable, it can be sent to the Crown Court as a related offence . However the Crown Court is restricted to passing a sentence of no more than 6 months imprisonment. What makes you sure that the CPS did accept the lesser offence of common assault?
Dia Rear, you are mistaken about the Jan 1st offence having to start as an ABH before being reduced to a common assault for it to be in the Crown Court. Where a common assault is linked to an offence which is indictable, it can be sent to the Crown Court as a related offence . However the Crown Court is restricted to passing a sentence of no more than 6 months imprisonment. What makes you sure that the CPS did accept the lesser offence of common assault? Whyme?
  • Score: 0

8:45pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Abertillery29 says...

The 'CPS' has shown over a number of years that it is not 'fit for purpose'. It needs a drastic overhaul as to how it arrives at its decisions in relation to the charging of offenders and so called plea bargaining but ,with so many legally trained Members of Parliament don't hold your breath.
The 'CPS' has shown over a number of years that it is not 'fit for purpose'. It needs a drastic overhaul as to how it arrives at its decisions in relation to the charging of offenders and so called plea bargaining but ,with so many legally trained Members of Parliament don't hold your breath. Abertillery29
  • Score: 1

10:27pm Thu 27 Feb 14

jimmysmith says...

paddlesnap wrote:
What I wouldn't give to beat the pathetic coward senseless. How can you do that to someone so defenceless?
i was thinking the same thing .
[quote][p][bold]paddlesnap[/bold] wrote: What I wouldn't give to beat the pathetic coward senseless. How can you do that to someone so defenceless?[/p][/quote]i was thinking the same thing . jimmysmith
  • Score: 1

8:41am Fri 28 Feb 14

Dai Rear says...

Whyme? wrote:
Dia Rear, you are mistaken about the Jan 1st offence having to start as an ABH before being reduced to a common assault for it to be in the Crown Court. Where a common assault is linked to an offence which is indictable, it can be sent to the Crown Court as a related offence . However the Crown Court is restricted to passing a sentence of no more than 6 months imprisonment. What makes you sure that the CPS did accept the lesser offence of common assault?
Yes you're right and I forgot about that. Sorry, my mind was still on S40 of the 1988 CJA. In which case it may very well have been sent as a common assault. The puzzle then is how Scott Parker punched 79-year-old Theresa Wall in the face on New Year’s Day without leaving a mark, all that would be necessary for an ABH charge. I know there's a tendency for CPS to undercharge for fear of elections but you don't get legal aid , in effect, most of the time for elections and he was going to Crown Court anyway, so why did they hold back? Punching a 79 year old disabled lady in the face is worth more than 2 months, though why His Honour didn't go for an unappealable 4 months remains a bit of a mystery .
[quote][p][bold]Whyme?[/bold] wrote: Dia Rear, you are mistaken about the Jan 1st offence having to start as an ABH before being reduced to a common assault for it to be in the Crown Court. Where a common assault is linked to an offence which is indictable, it can be sent to the Crown Court as a related offence . However the Crown Court is restricted to passing a sentence of no more than 6 months imprisonment. What makes you sure that the CPS did accept the lesser offence of common assault?[/p][/quote]Yes you're right and I forgot about that. Sorry, my mind was still on S40 of the 1988 CJA. In which case it may very well have been sent as a common assault. The puzzle then is how Scott Parker punched 79-year-old Theresa Wall in the face on New Year’s Day without leaving a mark, all that would be necessary for an ABH charge. I know there's a tendency for CPS to undercharge for fear of elections but you don't get legal aid , in effect, most of the time for elections and he was going to Crown Court anyway, so why did they hold back? Punching a 79 year old disabled lady in the face is worth more than 2 months, though why His Honour didn't go for an unappealable 4 months remains a bit of a mystery . Dai Rear
  • Score: 2

8:11pm Fri 28 Feb 14

digispamman says...

bring back the birch. then rub his wounds with salt.
bring back the birch. then rub his wounds with salt. digispamman
  • Score: 0

2:44pm Sat 1 Mar 14

Limestonecowboy says...

biker1 wrote:
Yet again the cps have pulled one out of the bag. 30 months for beating an elderly woman, it's pathetic and a fine example of what is wrong with this country. I don't know how a cps lawyer can sleep at night.
Whats wrong with this country is those who take drugs then beat pensioners senseless until the dangers of drugs is realised then this will keep happening. We still have the unsual 'drugs are hameless' brigade thats the problem.
[quote][p][bold]biker1[/bold] wrote: Yet again the cps have pulled one out of the bag. 30 months for beating an elderly woman, it's pathetic and a fine example of what is wrong with this country. I don't know how a cps lawyer can sleep at night.[/p][/quote]Whats wrong with this country is those who take drugs then beat pensioners senseless until the dangers of drugs is realised then this will keep happening. We still have the unsual 'drugs are hameless' brigade thats the problem. Limestonecowboy
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree