Two men sent to prison for GBH which left victim with dripping blood and ‘enormous’ swelling for ‘no reason’
Two men have been sentenced to 30 and 20 months respectively after pleading guilty to grievous bodily harm (GBH), which left a man with a dripping blood, “enormous” swelling and bruising earlier this year.
Sean Patrick Conybeare, aged 36, of no fixed abode, and Nathan Lucas, aged 33, of no fixed abode, were charged with Section 18 GBH - wounding with intent back in May. This was later changed to a Section 20 GBH offence.
The incident took place in the churchyard in St Giles’ Street on May 5 at around 6pm and both men appeared before court for the first time two days later.
It was on September 10 when they both pleaded guilty to GBH, ahead of their sentencing today (October 21).
Conybeare was sentenced to 30 months in total, 28 months for this GBH and an additional two months of a suspended sentence he was serving at the time of the incident were activated.
Lucas was sentenced to a 20-month custodial sentence.
The court heard from the prosecution first, who explained the argument began when the victim was on his way home from work.
There are two sets of CCTV footage, one which shows the incident unfolding and the other which shows the conclusion.
Conybeare initially squared up to the victim as Lucas attempted to hold him back, before he was later seen to join in with the attack. The victim reported that the pair were intoxicated at the time.
The court heard the victim’s phone was smashed, he was punched and kicked in the head and ribs, and the defendants were heard to be shouting ‘kick him’ when the victim phoned 999.
The prosecution said Lucas held the male to the ground as Conybeare punched him in the face, and the victim lost consciousness as he was being choked by Lucas.
The victim was taken to Northampton General Hospital after he was found dripping with blood and with “substantial swelling”. He had visual disturbance to one eye and reported issues with his cheekbones, jaw, lips, neck, one shoulder, rib cage and bloody nostrils.
There was a possible fracture to his right eye socket and to his ribs, as well as a liver and kidney injury, but the victim declined further medical tests and discharged himself.
Mr Green, defending Conybeare, addressed issues in his personal life relating to his health, mental health and relationship with alcohol.
The defence said as a 36-year-old with an 11-year-old son, Conybeare has realised this is not something he wishes to continue with – as he also has a number of previous convictions.
Mr Green hoped the Judge would give Conybeare credit for the work he has done in relation to previous convictions and the fact he entered a guilty plea ahead of the start of the planned trial.
Mr Vickers, defending Lucas, addressed his previous convictions – though only one of them related to violence, which placed him in a different position to Conybeare.
He hoped the Judge would consider a recent mental health assessment, deemed consistent with events in Lucas’ personal life – as well as the fact he initially tried to diffuse the altercation before he engaged, as shown in the CCTV.
As the Judge began his sentencing remarks, he said he accepted that Lucas did attempt to separate Conybeare before he became involved in the joint attack. For that, he said he could distinguish the defendants from one another, with Conybeare seeming “pretty aggressive” from the beginning.
The attack ended when Lucas had his hands around the victim’s neck and Conybeare was hitting him with his fists – which left the male with “enormous swelling” at the side of his face and blood dripping from his head.
The Judge addressed the bruising, swelling and bleeding the victim suffered, as well as possible organ and eye socket damage which could not be confirmed as the male discharged himself.
The court heard this supported the level of force used when the man was “attacked for no reason at all”, in a way that was “prolonged and persistent” and included the asphyxiation of the neck.
The aggravating factors included both defendant’s previous convictions and the fact this offence was committed under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The mitigating factors included the personal issues both defendants face in their lives, brought around by mental health struggles – and the fact they entered guilty pleas ahead of the planned trial starting.
The Judge concluded that with the seriousness of the crime, the fact it was in the middle of the day in a town centre churchyard, and that the victim was simply walking through, the pair were set to face time in prison. They will serve half of their custodial sentences before being released on licence.