September 29th, 2016

Community order for prolific offender who carried out crimes in Bromsgrove

Community order for prolific offender who carried out crimes in Bromsgrove Community order for prolific offender who carried out crimes in Bromsgrove
Updated: 10:49 am, May 07, 2015

A MAN who has committed a number of offences in Bromsgrove has been warned he could face jail if he breaches his latest court order.

Jonathan David Suckling, formerly of Foxwalks Avenue in Bromsgrove and now of Baxters Walk, Malvern, pleaded guilty to one count of theft from a shop and another of failing to surrender to bail at Redditch Magistrates’ Court on Monday (February 23).

The 31-year-old was also convicted of two charges of using threatening, abusive or insulting words and behaviour causing another person to feel alarmed or distressed. Suckling was found guilty of the one charge which took place on September 17, 2014, and admitted to the second, which was almost a month later on October 10.

The court heard on September 17, Suckling had been woken up after an argument outside his former Bromsgrove home erupted between three men about a dog.

Hearing the noise, Suckling opened his window and began to shout abusive language, telling them he would ‘f***ing kill’ them. Suckling was found guilty of that offence following a trial.

In the second incident, Suckling approached two of the people involved in the previous altercation.

As well as those incidents, Suckling also stood charged with the theft of a bottle of vodka after he was caught on CCTV on July 4 going into a Bromsgrove Co-Op with another man.

The final count, for failing to surrender to bail, related to a trial which Suckling failed to attend, although he did arrive later in time for the sentencing.

Defending, Dean Hicks said Suckling had been travelling from Malvern and so was late for his trial.

He added his client had recently found a new girlfriend who he had been with since November and was living in Malvern happily.

Mr Hicks said Suckling had a chequered history of community orders but had stayed out of trouble since November and had stopped drinking and taking other substances.

“I have known him for a long time and he seems to be in a better place than he was,” he added.

“He has been applying for jobs but his record and lack of job history is against him.”

Mr Hicks requested for his client to be given a community order with a curfew requirement rather than be ordered to pay £600 costs for his trial because he already owed nearly £1,400 in compensation for previous convictions.

Chair of the bench Charles Townsend said Suckling’s financial situation was nothing short of dire. He ordered him to pay £16.89 in compensation for the theft offence.

Suckling was also given a community order requiring him to complete 150 hours of unpaid work and was told to pay a £60 victim surcharge.

Mr Townsend added any breach of the order would be ‘serious’ and could see Suckling face jail.