A teen who drunkenly smashed a bottle over a woman’s head on Union Street has avoided a custodial sentence – because he was just 16 at the time.
The teenager, now 17, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, lashed out with the bottle during a row with a beggar about drugs.
The victim of the attack at around 1pm on July 31 2020 was left with blood spurting from her head and required 26 stitches.
Sentence had been deferred on the teen for reports after he previously pled guilty to a charge of assault to severe injury and permanent disfigurement.
Woman offered to get teen £20 of cannabis
Defence agent Gail Goodfellow said: “He makes no excuses for his behaviour, but there is an explanation which suggests it wasn’t entirely an unprovoked assault.”
She said her client had been walking along Union Street with a friend, both drinking alcohol, when they were approached by the woman who asked for money.
He initially refused, but the woman then “asked the boys if they smoke weed”.
Mrs Goodfellow said: “When they confirmed they did, she offered to get them £20 worth.”
Teen ‘lost his temper’ after being pushed
She then “snatched” the money from him before walking off, followed by the boys who thought she was going to get them drugs.
The solicitor said: “It soon became apparent she had no intention whatsoever of getting anything for them.
“It seems the situation became heated when the three of them were waiting to cross the road at the junction with Bridge Street.”
Mrs Goodfellow said the woman “pushed” her client to the chest and “put her fists up”.
She added: “Very much regrettably, it’s at that stage he lost his temper and struck the complainer with the bottle he had been holding all the while.
“He was shocked and appalled when he realised the consequences of his actions.
“Regardless of the background, he understands he was very wrong to react in the way he did.”
‘Lack of maturity and common sense’
Sheriff Graham Buchanan told the teen: “It’s certainly the case that if you had been a man of 23, 24, 25 years of age, it’s almost inevitable a custodial sentence would have been imposed for this serious offence, which resulted in significant injury to the complainer.
“But of course, I have to sentence you as a 17-year-old who committed this offence when you were 16 years of age.
“The sentencing guidelines indicate that courts must have regard to the young age of people who appear before them and make allowance for things like lack of maturity.
“I’m prepared to accept your lack of maturity and common sense in relation to how to handle this situation playing a part in what took place.”
He imposed 12 months supervision and 220 hours of unpaid work as a direct alternative to a custodial sentence.
This article originally appeared on the Evening Express website. For more information, read about our new combined website.