General Chat

I think so Sylvia, now the McGarahan family can draw a line under the court proceedings altho it will be hard for them for longer than the time those idiots are inside, theirs is a real life sentence.

Lizx

great news!

Just heard on the news that the original sentences have been upheld and this apparently will be a bit of a guideline to other judges so anyone else murdering an innocent person can expect to get a few years inside and not be able to appeal against it! Their solicitor was on tv saying it's a shame as he hoped to get a bit of time off their sentences as they had held their hands up to the 'manslaughter' and pleaded guilty from the start.

So Flipping What! They killed a man who was trying to defend another person they had started fighting with, why should they get less time to serve, little creeps.

I am so pleased about this - it would have been a kick in the stomach to Frank McGarahan's family had they been told these lowlife would be out in less time.

At last some justice and common sense, altho probably Legal Aid paid for the appeal so it cost everyone!

Lizx

Jean, I am seeing the effects of that with o.h.'s sons, namby pambied, always loaned money which they seemed to think they never had to pay back, and still haven't by one of his sons. A good example was when his dad paid his car insurance for him as he was driving without it, but getting ready to go on holiday with girlfriend and her family to the States, this is where the obsession with America started. When he got back he gave his father a watch for late Father's Day gift. Dad reminded him of the loan for car ins. and boy got in a strop and stormed out, saying I can't believe you ask me for that when I have just bought you a nice watch!!!
(The watch has long since broken, o.h. took it to be repaired and was told it wasn't worth repairing - nuff said!) Car Ins. loan was never repaid and more gone the same way since, even subsidising now he living in N.Y. with his newish American wife!

Lizx

Seems to me that drink is too easily available, and where do the youngsters get the money if not from their parents? My OH hasnt had a drink since he was 19, and I have only had at work dinners for special occasions. Not that I dont like it, but have seen at first hand the damage it can do to family life. Our son liked a drink, but we never subsidised him, and he paid his keep when at home.Not mentioning the loans he had from us to tide him over when out of work! Too many parents let their children think that their keep is free and it doesnt prepare them for the real world.

Janey, I do so agree with you about the alcohol problem. When I managed student houses the girls more than the lads used to tell me they didn't think a night out was a good one if they could remember it! They were all ok sort of girls from nice families some of them having parents with money, some with parents that struggled to keep them at uni, yet more or less all of the girls and lads could afford alcohol, and not just beer, it was spirits and champagne for birthdays etc at the house and then going out afterwards for more booze! One lot of young people and some of them only 19 or 20 had to go out and look for their friend after she phoned them saying she was lost. She had got so drunk, when in the taxi she couldn't remember her address so thought she recognised where she was and told the taxi driver to drop her off, she paid him and he left, then she realised she didn't know the area at all and couldn't find her way home.
As you say, with the amount of alcohol seemingly consumed while on the boards and off, and believe me, a few years back there seemed to be even more of it being drunk while people posted inflammatory comments and rows kicked off, I wonder at the example it sets to youngsters or has done as they grew up. For sure, I couldn't afford booze when my son was young, his needs came first and I would never have thought of sitting home drinking wine and spirits etc. Occasionally a friend would bring a bottle of wine round but it often didn't get drunk completely so I would give it to them to take home with them.
I know I used to drink a fair amount when I was out socialising in the 60s, 70's and early 80's but very rarely enough to say I was drunk, most of the time just a bit merry. I try to convince my son he doesn't need to go over the top when out, but now because of finances he can't even afford to get too drunk when out, altho he tells me his friends who have more to spend cos they live at home with Mum and Dad, often spend £50 or so on an evening's drinking! And not just one evening a week either!

Schools here have tried to give talks, filmshows, discussion groups etc etc to try and change the binge drinking culture that has developed over the past years but doesn't seem to be getting far with it, judging by the state of the youngsters in our nightlife area by the riverside and station here in Norwich.

There is something that is called Carnage where organised pub crawls go on, mostly connected to universities and such and it's similar to the pub crawls (booze cruises) that started on the 18-30 holidays in Spain and Ibiza etc Carnage comes to a town or city and they all wear the same Carnage tshirt over their clothes and troop from pub to pub to club enmasse, with the behaviour becoming more and more rowdy and silly, people urinating in the streets and all sorts of ridiculous behaviour. Until this can be curbed, there will always be the problem of out of control persons carrying out unspeakable things against others.
Frank McG was also out drinking after a meal with family, he and his male relatives had stayed at a club drinking while the women and youngsters had gone home to bed, ready for a Baptism the next day at the local Catholic cathedral. Had he gone home with the family he would have been here to attend the Baptism and see his daughters grow up.

Things have to change

Lizx

Gimme a chance, Lizz! ;)


No, I don't think that nice boys get drunk and beat up homeless people. And I am glad there are people in the world like Mr McGarahan ... even with him gone.

I'm not sure that prison is a good answer to any of this.

I look at the boards here some nights, and the amount of alcohol that people claim to be consuming ... and I think I believe most of them ... and wonder.

I do follow the situation in the UK as regards alcohol and violence, in various sources, and I am aghast. I know the level of violence doesn't compare to the US, for instance, much as the gun militants there like to pretend it does, but it's the kind of violence. Very young people, and it revolves around alcohol. The alcohol abuse and alcoholism problem in the UK, especially among young people, is frightening. And these sorts of things are exactly what do result.

Rather than bemoaning the fact that young men like this won't be spending the rest of their lives in prison, I'd be looking to what could possibly be done to prevent so many young men like this -- and growing numbers of young women -- from becoming violent, conscienceless drunks.

n for Janey Canuck

n for Janey Canuck

When you look at some paltry sentences, just a few months sometimes, and then calculate the cost of the paperwork etc to implement the sentence, it must seem a waste of time. It's all down to the interpretation of the types of sentence which make a mockery of justice, I think. Things should be set out more clearly and precisely and people should be aware of the length of sentence they could get and the fact that no appeal would be allowed on certain sentences, like this one for example, and then maybe, just maybe, a few people might have the gumption to think twice about committing such awful crimes. Frank McGarahan's family are the ones with the longest sentence, life without their loved one.

Why is it that parents can never believe their little darlings can be monsters? Must stress, not all of them but agood many dont see anything wrong in what they getup to. Longer more severe sentences is what we need. You can get longer for theft.

Words fail me, what a sad sad world we live in!
Carol

That's how I feel, too many people who can't take the punishment and cost the country so much money by appealing against their sentences.


Lizx

Louts like these two upon appeal should have their sentence doubled
,As word gets round ,these people would accept the sentence passed down ,and save the country millions in cort costs ,usually paid for by the taxpayer.Fred

Well thank goodness they only used "moderate force", to kill him, that must be a great comfort to Mr McGarahans family, and of course another nice little earner for the yobs solicitor.

As we can no longer string the two little barstools up I hope they get an awful lot longer put ON their sentances.

Barb

This is the report printed in October 2008, it shows the kind of boys they were I think:

Yobs carried on attacking have-a-go Barclays banker as he lay dying By Dan Newling and David Williams
Last updated at 7:54 AM on 01st October 2008


A doorman who went to the aid of murdered banker Frank McGarahan told last night how 12 thugs continued to attack him even as he lay unconscious.
Darryl Lawton described how the gang was 'really laying into' the 45-year-old and his cousin who were both on the ground when he arrived at the scene.
'If I had been there just a few seconds earlier I could have saved Frank,' Mr Lawton said last night.


The 42-year-old bouncer had been clearing up at a club in Norwich city centre at 3am on Sunday when he heard the fight.
He ran to help Mr McGarahan and two relatives, who themselves had tried to help a homeless Lithuanian man and his girlfriend who were being set upon by the thugs.
But when he saw the position of the banker's body he feared that he was already dead.
'There must have been 12 young men in the gang which was violently assaulting two men on the floor,' said Mr Lawton, who suffered a broken jaw when they turned on him after he grabbed their ringleader.
Frank McGarahan tried to help a homeless couple, but ended up the victim of merciless thugs
'They were really laying into them,' he said. 'I could see that one of them - Frank - was unconscious. Another man - Frank's brother - was being pinned up against a shop window.
'They kicked me and punched me in the head and back. I took as much as I could, but I had to let go of the guy I was holding. I am gutted that I let go.
'When I turned around I could see that Frank was dead.'
Mr Lawton, from King's Lynn, Norfolk, added: 'The whole thing must have been over in 30 seconds. I am so gutted that I wasn't there earlier.'
Police investigating the murder said yesterday they had arrested three men and appealed for more witnesses to come forward.
The men are all in their early 20s and are from the Norwich area. A spokesman said the men were being held at police stations across Norfolk.
The scene of the murder is only 300yards from Norfolk police's operational headquarters, although it is closed to the public between midnight and 8am.
It emerged yesterday that police have CCTV pictures of Mr McGarahan remonstrating with the gang after going to the aid of the couple. It is understood officers also have images of the assault.
Mr McGarahan was the chief operating officer with Barclays Wealth, the bespoke finance arm which caters for the bank's richest customers, and managed their combined assets of £133billion.
On Saturday evening the family went out for dinner ahead of a christening the following day.
His wife Alison, 42, a former flight attendant, and their two children, aged seven and four months, returned to their hotel but Mr McGarahan stayed out for a drink with his brother Kevin and a cousin.
Scene of murder: The taxi rank on Guildhall Hill in Norwich where Frank McGarahan was assaulted
The trio were waiting for a taxi when they saw the 35-year-old man and his 45-year- old girlfriend being assaulted.
Another of Mr McGarahan's brothers, Tony, said the banker could not 'stand by and watch' as thugs attacked a defenceless couple.

'We will never understand how or why anyone could murder such a decent, caring and loving man,' he said.
'We will never comprehend it or truly recover from it.'
Tony McGarahan is the interim communications manager of Bradford & Bingley and was dealing with media calls about the troubled bank the night before his brother's murder.
Speaking outside his brother's home in Much Hadham, Hertfordshire, he said: 'Throughout Frank's all-too-short life he always wanted to help others.
'Last Saturday, he did what was natural to him to try and help someone.'
He added: 'Frank has paid the ultimate price of life for being a good citizen.
'We are all devastated by our loss', he said. 'He was simply a great family man.'
Detective Superintendent Chris Hobley of Norfolk Police said Mr McGarahan had not physically tried to break-up the fight but had merely ' had words' with the gang.
The tragedy has highlighted the dangers of going to someone's aid and Mr Hobley said: 'He has clearly taken a view on somebody suffering an assault and that view is understandable. I don't think he would have expected this outcome.'
The homeless couple required hospital treatment.

ah, but a good lawyer can spin anything!


question is ..................... will the law lords believe the spin?



sylvia

Killer brothers appeal sentence

03 December 2009

Two brothers who beat a father of two to death in a Norwich street are “good lads” who deserve to have their sentences slashed, the country's top judge was told at the Court of Appeal today.

Ben Cowles, 21, and his brother Tom Cowles, 22, are appealing against their sentences for the manslaughter of senior banking executive, Frank McGarahan, from Much Hadham, near Bishop's Stortford, Herts.

Ben Cowles was jailed for seven-and-a-half years and his brother for seven years after admitting killing the 45-year-old chief executive of Barclays Wealth during a night out in the city in September 2008.

But both now say their sentences are too long and today asked the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, sitting with four senior colleagues, to grant reductions in their prison terms.

Lawyers for the brothers, both of Beaumont Road, Costessey, say the sentences imposed are “manifestly excessive”.

Both had been on a night out in the city and had fallen into a fight with a homeless Lithuanian man, Robertas Sinkevicius, at the entrance to Dove Street in the early hours of September 28, 2008.

But the fight had ended when Mr McGarahan and his own party appeared and the brothers were branded “cowards” for their part in the previous altercation.

A new fight then ensued, during which Mr McGarahan, a banker who studied law at Southampton University, was put in a headlock and punched repeatedly.

Mr McGarahan, who ran an arm of Barclays Bank which managed the assets of some of the world's richest people, died in hospital.

Following the brothers' sentencing, his family described the prison terms as “disgraceful” and called for a review of the law to allow higher sentences.

But today, the brothers' lawyers said they had not been treated leniently, but much too severely and had received sentences which were “much too long”.

Michael Hubbard QC said: “It was not a sustained attack, it was not pre-meditated, the application of force was on the moderate side.

“There were no facial injuries found, no fractures.

“I have to accept that there was a degree of punching, coincidental with the headlock, but thereafter, nothing.

“We suggest that, if this had been a sustained attack with application of force of great severity, kicking on the ground to the head, then one might have expected to find aggravating features which took it above six years - but not in this case.

“These are two good lads from good homes, and they have done splendidly well.

“They are the sort of lads who spend their quiet hours fishing, at home with mum and dad, with a job and have, as much as they can, redeemed themselves while in custody.

“We suggest there were infinitely more mitigating factors than there were aggravating factors.”

But lawyers for the Crown said punching to the face showed there had been an intention to hurt Mr McGarahan and was close to an intention to cause “really serious harm”, which could have provided the basis for an allegation of murder.

After hearing the arguments, Lord Judge, who heard today's appeal with Lord Justice Thomas, Lord Justice Hughes, Mr Justice Simon and Mr Justice Royce, said the court would give its judgment on the brothers' appeals at a later date.

Addressing Mr McGarahan's family, Lord Judge added: “We cannot leave this case without being entirely aware of what a ghastly incident this was and there are a lot of people who are grieving.”


___________

What a load of twaddle, quiet times at home with parents, fishing etc, it was said at the trial that they had been boxers, but had been in trouble fighting already!

It would be scandalous if their sentences were reduced at all.


Lizx