Luke Green given suspended sentence after crushing woman’s leg in car door during row

Bournemouth Echo: ASSAULT: Luke Green arrives at Bournemouth Magistrate’s court ASSAULT: Luke Green arrives at Bournemouth Magistrate’s court

A TEENAGER who crushed a woman’s leg in a car door during a row had become angry after being “slapped by his partner”, a court heard.

Luke Daniel Mark Neil Green, of Sea Road in Boscombe, injured his sister’s friend Abigail Yates after a night out in the Christchurch Road area of Bournemouth.

He had been struck by his girlfriend before turning on Miss Yates as she sat in her car in the early hours of April 27, it was said.

Prosecuting, Alison Saunders said: “The victim was with the defendant’s sister Chantelle.

“Miss Yates parked her car and remained in it while Miss Green got out to speak to friends. The defendant, who recognised the victim, approached the car and started giving verbal abuse through the window.”

As the 19-year-old grew angrier, he kicked the car door, causing damage to it, before “punching the driver’s window” and trying to access the Kia Picanto, the prosecutor said.

“He slammed the door, striking Miss Yates’s leg and causing bruising as she attempted to kick out at him,” Ms Saunders said.

“The victim tried to close the door – he slammed it again, causing her hand to be struck. Fortunately, Miss Yates did not suffer an injury to her hand.”

In a statement read to the court, the victim said: “The assault terrified me and I was crying my eyes out.”

She added: “I believe he is more than capable of assaulting me again.”

In mitigation, Mark Proctor said he turned on Miss Yates after seeing his sister arguing with another girl and attempting to intervene.

“She started shouting at him, so he began shouting back. He got slapped by his partner and he was angry so he lashed out,” he said.

Unemployed Green admitted assault by beating and criminal damage at Bournemouth Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday. He was handed an eight-week prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and ordered to complete 80 hours of unpaid work. The defendant will pay costs, and is the subject of a 12 month restraining order that means he must keep away from Miss Yates.

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:13pm Sat 14 Jun 14

High Treason says...

Obviously he is not bothered, grinning like an idiot whilst arriving at court. I wonder if his existing girlfriend will be the next suffering from this idiot.
Obviously he is not bothered, grinning like an idiot whilst arriving at court. I wonder if his existing girlfriend will be the next suffering from this idiot. High Treason
  • Score: 39

12:34pm Sat 14 Jun 14

ben111 says...

As his mum would say hes not a bad lad. we all have a temper.

Hands up if their is anyone who has a spare door that requires the leg of Mr Green
As his mum would say hes not a bad lad. we all have a temper. Hands up if their is anyone who has a spare door that requires the leg of Mr Green ben111
  • Score: 13

12:49pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.
I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: -27

1:12pm Sat 14 Jun 14

mrmayfly says...

the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.
the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline. mrmayfly
  • Score: 14

1:17pm Sat 14 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.
You clearly didn't read the whole report did you Sir Bitchy Head.

There was a guilty plea of assault by beating and criminal damage, what's trivial about that?

With a bit of luck he'll learn how to control his temper in the future.

It's just a shame this already unemployed guy is now even more unemployable than he was before the incident
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.[/p][/quote]You clearly didn't read the whole report did you Sir Bitchy Head. There was a guilty plea of assault by beating and criminal damage, what's trivial about that? With a bit of luck he'll learn how to control his temper in the future. It's just a shame this already unemployed guy is now even more unemployable than he was before the incident boardsandphotos
  • Score: 23

2:00pm Sat 14 Jun 14

High Treason says...

mrmayfly wrote:
the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.
mrmayfly wrote:
His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend.

Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children.
[quote][p][bold]mrmayfly[/bold] wrote: the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.[/p][/quote]mrmayfly wrote: His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children. High Treason
  • Score: 28

2:13pm Sat 14 Jun 14

AdamSFC says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.
I put my life on the fact that if someone did this to you, you would be up in arms demanding the perpetrator be brought to justice. So why should it be different for this victim?
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.[/p][/quote]I put my life on the fact that if someone did this to you, you would be up in arms demanding the perpetrator be brought to justice. So why should it be different for this victim? AdamSFC
  • Score: 15

2:25pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

His sentence should be a fifty pound fine and ordered to shed fifty pounds by Christmas.
His sentence should be a fifty pound fine and ordered to shed fifty pounds by Christmas. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 8

2:47pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Horridbloke says...

This new series of Little Britain isn't as good as the old ones.
This new series of Little Britain isn't as good as the old ones. Horridbloke
  • Score: 8

3:41pm Sat 14 Jun 14

rozmister says...

mrmayfly wrote:
the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.
So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court.
[quote][p][bold]mrmayfly[/bold] wrote: the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.[/p][/quote]So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court. rozmister
  • Score: 13

4:43pm Sat 14 Jun 14

mrmayfly says...

"So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court."

I have not defended his behaviour. I am pointing to the fact that his girlfriend engaged in an action that should not have occurred. She should ALSO have gone to court.
"So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court." I have not defended his behaviour. I am pointing to the fact that his girlfriend engaged in an action that should not have occurred. She should ALSO have gone to court. mrmayfly
  • Score: 1

4:48pm Sat 14 Jun 14

mrmayfly says...

High Treason wrote:
mrmayfly wrote:
the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.
mrmayfly wrote:
His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend.

Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children.
Unfortunately that world is long gone. His behaviour is that of a thug, and the court have addressed this. They should also deal with the provocation that probably contributed to it. That provocation is technically domestic violence. I'm not saying to do so is gets to the heart of the matter, or that he is a 'victim' rather than an aggressor. I am saying the CPS is applying two sets of standards and that this contributes to the problem. It is not a question of proportionality
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrmayfly[/bold] wrote: the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.[/p][/quote]mrmayfly wrote: His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately that world is long gone. His behaviour is that of a thug, and the court have addressed this. They should also deal with the provocation that probably contributed to it. That provocation is technically domestic violence. I'm not saying to do so is gets to the heart of the matter, or that he is a 'victim' rather than an aggressor. I am saying the CPS is applying two sets of standards and that this contributes to the problem. It is not a question of proportionality mrmayfly
  • Score: 6

4:48pm Sat 14 Jun 14

mrmayfly says...

High Treason wrote:
mrmayfly wrote:
the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.
mrmayfly wrote:
His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend.

Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children.
Unfortunately that world is long gone. His behaviour is that of a thug, and the court have addressed this. They should also deal with the provocation that probably contributed to it. That provocation is technically domestic violence. I'm not saying to do so is gets to the heart of the matter, or that he is a 'victim' rather than an aggressor. I am saying the CPS is applying two sets of standards and that this contributes to the problem. It is not a question of proportionality
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrmayfly[/bold] wrote: the guy behave liked a vicious thug, but his thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. That is in itself a physical assault and in the context domestic violence. Both he and the girlfriend should have gone to court or neither. Incidentally the woman's leg wasn't crushed, she suffered some bruising, but that doesn't make for a good headline.[/p][/quote]mrmayfly wrote: His thuggery was a response to being slapped by his girlfriend. Not in my day. No matter what the provocation you never hit a woman. But then we used to open doors, give up seats on a bus and never swear in front of women and children.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately that world is long gone. His behaviour is that of a thug, and the court have addressed this. They should also deal with the provocation that probably contributed to it. That provocation is technically domestic violence. I'm not saying to do so is gets to the heart of the matter, or that he is a 'victim' rather than an aggressor. I am saying the CPS is applying two sets of standards and that this contributes to the problem. It is not a question of proportionality mrmayfly
  • Score: 4

4:59pm Sat 14 Jun 14

westhowl says...

looking at the grinning slimey sleaze ball he needs to diet do hard labour scum off the earth
looking at the grinning slimey sleaze ball he needs to diet do hard labour scum off the earth westhowl
  • Score: 3

5:00pm Sat 14 Jun 14

cromwell9 says...

If he did that to my Daughter, He would be visiting the A/E,
Another moron walking the streets.
If he did that to my Daughter, He would be visiting the A/E, Another moron walking the streets. cromwell9
  • Score: 4

6:00pm Sat 14 Jun 14

zabadoo says...

Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/11
061015.In_The_Dock__
Bournemouth/
Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou thecho.co.uk/news/11 061015.In_The_Dock__ Bournemouth/ zabadoo
  • Score: 3

7:40pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Gypsy gal 1 says...

He's scum and whoever tried to defend what he has done shouldn't, he is a very violent boy who deserves a lot more than what he's got
He's scum and whoever tried to defend what he has done shouldn't, he is a very violent boy who deserves a lot more than what he's got Gypsy gal 1
  • Score: 3

7:52pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

zabadoo wrote:
Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou

thecho.co.uk/news/11

061015.In_The_Dock__

Bournemouth/
as above -

LUKE DANIEL MARK NEIL GREEN aged 18 of Sea Road, Boscombe. Admitted making phone calls of a grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing character. Also admitted using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to cause fear of unlawful violence at Wimborne High Street. Also admitted stealing meat belonging to Tesco, Glenmore Road, West Parley. Community order made to participate in Education, Training and Employment for 20 days and be under a curfew for eight weeks and be electronically monitored. To pay victim surcharge of £60. Costs £50.
[quote][p][bold]zabadoo[/bold] wrote: Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou thecho.co.uk/news/11 061015.In_The_Dock__ Bournemouth/[/p][/quote]as above - LUKE DANIEL MARK NEIL GREEN aged 18 of Sea Road, Boscombe. Admitted making phone calls of a grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing character. Also admitted using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to cause fear of unlawful violence at Wimborne High Street. Also admitted stealing meat belonging to Tesco, Glenmore Road, West Parley. Community order made to participate in Education, Training and Employment for 20 days and be under a curfew for eight weeks and be electronically monitored. To pay victim surcharge of £60. Costs £50. Bob49
  • Score: 7

8:05pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Gypsy gal 1 says...

zabadoo wrote:
Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou

thecho.co.uk/news/11

061015.In_The_Dock__

Bournemouth/
Why won't it let me see that?
[quote][p][bold]zabadoo[/bold] wrote: Hmm, sounds a real loser, look at this! http://www.bournemou thecho.co.uk/news/11 061015.In_The_Dock__ Bournemouth/[/p][/quote]Why won't it let me see that? Gypsy gal 1
  • Score: -2

11:27pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

err, that was what I just posted - the contents of that link
err, that was what I just posted - the contents of that link Bob49
  • Score: 1

7:01am Sun 15 Jun 14

Ginny nz says...

I think this arrogant little man need t get anger management help !!
I think this arrogant little man need t get anger management help !! Ginny nz
  • Score: 5

8:17am Sun 15 Jun 14

kalebmoledirt says...

No stranger to a McDonald's would benefit from a a good slap and some porridge
No stranger to a McDonald's would benefit from a a good slap and some porridge kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 2

8:20am Sun 15 Jun 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Blimey they are a nice big couple do they share clothes ,
Blimey they are a nice big couple do they share clothes , kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 2

12:23pm Sun 15 Jun 14

bubbles20 says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.
what a stupid comment. so it wouldnt bother you if this happened to your daughter?
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: I can't believe such trivia even gets to court. Handbags at dawn. It's just a kiddies row. No wonder the courts are clogged up if this type of thing is considered important.[/p][/quote]what a stupid comment. so it wouldnt bother you if this happened to your daughter? bubbles20
  • Score: 3

6:28pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Gypsy gal 1 says...

He wouldn't need somebody to provoke him he's hit girls before he's an animal who needs to be locked behind bars if I'm totally honest
He wouldn't need somebody to provoke him he's hit girls before he's an animal who needs to be locked behind bars if I'm totally honest Gypsy gal 1
  • Score: 2

10:30am Mon 16 Jun 14

rozmister says...

mrmayfly wrote:
"So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court."

I have not defended his behaviour. I am pointing to the fact that his girlfriend engaged in an action that should not have occurred. She should ALSO have gone to court.
You compared two crimes that had different levels of violence and said it's one or nothing - attacking a stranger is treated differently to a domestic incident and rightly so. Both SHOULD be in court but just because his girlfriend who committed a less serious crime didn't appear in court at the same time doesn't mean he should get off scot free.
[quote][p][bold]mrmayfly[/bold] wrote: "So if your partner hits you it's fine for you to go on a rampage attacking other innocent bystanders? And you should get off scot free because your girlfriend hit you first? Smells like BS to me. He attacked an innocent woman, significantly more violently than the single slap he received from his girlfriend, he should definitely have been in court." I have not defended his behaviour. I am pointing to the fact that his girlfriend engaged in an action that should not have occurred. She should ALSO have gone to court.[/p][/quote]You compared two crimes that had different levels of violence and said it's one or nothing - attacking a stranger is treated differently to a domestic incident and rightly so. Both SHOULD be in court but just because his girlfriend who committed a less serious crime didn't appear in court at the same time doesn't mean he should get off scot free. rozmister
  • Score: 2

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