Suspended sentence for driver who stamped on cyclist’s head

Could the possible bias of driver vs typically annoying cyclist (how very rude of them to be stopped by the side of the road, how would cars be able to mount the kerb?) have caused such a light sentencing?

Even with such bias it's staggering that someone (let along a motorist vs a cyclist) could have violently attacked another person, unprovoked and in broad daylight for a consecutive time and escaped with what is basically a slap on the wrists.

Even the claim about his dog seems like one of those pity votes - say, like those given to violent young rapists and assaulters whose 'budding careers' are considered as mitigating factors in handing them a reduced sentence.

Like with most on here, I cannot see how with the evidence supplied it is a 18 week sentence, let alone it is suspended. The previous convictions, the un provokedness of it, the fact he went off and came back and continued it (was his partner also charged?)

Apparently the Honoury Recorder is the top judge in the area but he needs to seriously look at himself over the paltry sentence given.

Erm - "suspended"???? 

Appalling, staggering, literally incredibly lenient sentencing, given his record and the completly random attack on people who had done him no wrong whatsoever.  If anyone feels like starting a crowdfunder to appeal this sentence, count me in for a few quid.

Since we're currently going through a lot of soul searching and protests about women and violence, this sentence sends all the wrong messages, and I'm betting if he's happy to attack a random woman in broad daylight, he's pretty violent to them the rest of the time.

EDIT: I've posted the Lancashire Post link on fb to see if any people currently interested in violence against women pick it up. 

One to add to the Road Rage- Why do Motorists hate Cyclists thread.

I hope someone (preferrably CPS) will appeal the sentence given the history

Judge Robert Altham, please can you explain exactly what was going through your tiny mind?

FFS

Very poor decision by a lower court.  I suspect if this had gone to a crown (edited from magistrates) court (and it should have imo) the sentencing would have been higher.

(Edited to correct it was infact a Crown Court - Jesus wept!). 

Sentencing guidelines.  I can see at least 2 aggravating factors - how many can you spot?  Starting point should have been 6 months jail time.

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/ass...

Jesus wept....

"Hayton, who has previous convictions for violence, admits causing actual bodily harm and common assault.

His defence lawyer said he accepted he should have "reacted differently" and felt ashamed.

She told the court the family's dog, which he was going out to walk on the day in question, had had to be put to sleep a couple of hours before the sentencing hearing."

So this violent thug, as evidenced by previous convictions for violent thuggery, is supposed to escape jail because his fucking DOG has just been put down?

Shame the vet didn't do him at the same time.

I would instinctively say something like 'unbelievable', but tragically it's far from it. It's enragingly typical. 

How is he not a danger to others? Lock him up for Chris' sake.

So previous convictions for violent conduct, caught on film, drove away & came back but only gets a suspended sentence?  What the actual fuck is wrong with the justice system in this country?