Court curfew for car damage pair

News from the Lincs Free Press and Spalding Guardian,, @LincsFreePress on Twitter
News from the Lincs Free Press and Spalding Guardian,, @LincsFreePress on Twitter
Have your say

Two men who threw stones and smashed windows in five cars have been ordered to jointly pay £100 compensation to each of the owners.

Spalding men Thomas Berry (19), of Stonegate, and Liam Martin (20), of Halmer Gate, were also given a four week curfew – keeping them indoors at home between 9pm-4am – when they appeared in court for sentence.

They must each pay a £60 victim surcharge and £85 costs.

The men pleaded guilty at a previous hearing to five counts of criminally damaging vehicles in the town’s Holland Road on November 2.

Magistrates heard the men had been to a party and were walking along Holland Road just after midnight when they shattered the windscreen in an Isuzu Trooper pick-up owned by Brian Kirk and a rock was found on its bonnet.

Jim Clare, prosecuting, said a rear offside window in a Peugeot was smashed, next was a Skoda Fabia which had its front nearside window smashed by a piece of brick that also damaged the passenger seat and handbrake, then an Audi had its front offside window shattered and finally a Vauxhall Insignia had its front offside window smashed.

He said Berry and Martin were seen running away, but were followed by one of the vehicle owners, Andrew Pennington, who told them police had been called.

Mr Clare said there seemed to have been “something of an altercation” and both men were described as “somewhat aggressive”.

Police found Berry and Martin, who fully admitted causing the damage.

Mr Clare said: “It appears that they took it upon themselves that it would be a good idea to go about smashing up people’s cars.”

Solicitor Rachel Stevens, for Martin, said: “This was a moment of madness in his life and extremely out of character for him.

“I don’t suppose either of them can explain what they were thinking.”

Solicitor Daven Naghen, for Berry, said: “It can only be described on his behalf as a moment of madness or ten to 15 minutes of madness. It is not behaviour in which he would normally indulge.”

The court heard neither man had blamed the other and took joint responsibility.