By Will Sturgeon, 20 April 2004 11:30
NEWS An 18-year-old from Bridgend in Wales who tried to play a sick joke on clubbers at a Cardiff nightspot has been jailed for six months.
Ryan Jenkins was in the Creation nightclub in Cardiff when he decided to take advantage of a large screen above the dance floor that was broadcasting clubbers' text messages.
Jenkins attempted to send a message to the screen that read: "There is a bomb in the building and you are all going to die" but staff screened the message and alerted the police, who traced the hapless Jenkins via his mobile number.
Jenkins pleaded guilty to communicating false information with intent at Cardiff Crown Court yesterday.
Even Jenkins' own defence said he was guilty of "crass stupidity" but blamed the trainee electrician's actions on the fact he was "in a rather drunken condition" and claimed he was generally a hard-working young man from a respectable family.
Peter Davies, for the defence, added: "It was a young man behaving in a daft way because he had been drinking.”
However, that defence carried little sway with Judge Neil Bidder QC, who sentenced Jenkins to six months in a young offenders' institute saying such pranks in the current climate of high terror alert could not be tolerated or taken lightly.
He told Jenkins: "That message, had it gone on to the screen, could have caused panic in the club."
Judge Bidder added: "It is essential that sentences are imposed for offences such as this that will deter other people from sending such messages, whatever their motives."
Comments
There are 31 comments. Join the discussion
1. Angus D
Thats a tad harsh don't you think.
2. Vic
No Angus. I support that decision. If you live in Northern Ireland, you take these things VERY seriously... I know that it did not happen here, but you know the story about the boy who cried wolf...
3. anonymous
Wow. An out of touch judge. Has he ever been to a club? (not the gentlemans type)
4. Simon Cox
That is harsh! Maybee a couple of hundred hours of community service would have been appropriate. What sentence would you get for jaywalking in Newport?
5. anonymous
Okay the message was screened. If the guy had run around the room screeming there's a bomb and was then challanged it would become obvious it was a prank. Rather than jail this person for a minor offence, shouldn't some of these technologies and service providers make their sytems child proof!
6. M Clarke
Not really harsh.. if the message had reached the screen, people probably would have been trampled to death.
Tough to think of those outcomes when you're a little drunk of course...
It was a really stupid thing to do given today's terrorist activities.
7. Simon
It may look harsh, but how would you have felt if it was your daughter/son in there, and if they'd been trampled/injured/killed in the panic?
8. Nick Bloor
Being drunk is not an excuse for any behaviour. He would have been better off taking complete responsibility for his actions and then throwing himself on the mercy of the judge.
The problem with text messaging is that you cannot always tell if somebody is joking.
9. Mark SPLINTER
Laughable. Anyone that panics after seeing a message like that on a screen in a nightclub should stop reading the Daily Mail. That includes the prosecuting police force who presumably had no crack addicts or murderers to catch that day.
Is it possible that banning alcohol would render the police force redundant?
10. anonymous
Again it seems that the "professionals" within our legal system have great difficulty in differentiating between somebody that deserves to be incarcerated and somebody who needs to be educated. Perhaps had the offence have been mugging, child abuse, preaching terrorism or murder the punishment would have been lighter?
Disillusioned even further.
11. Mark
Apauling, the 18yr old who stole my motorbike and commited a string of over 200 other offences got 35hrs community service and i got a police impound bill of £200 for the compulsary storage of my bike while they fingerprinted it, and this guy gets 6 months for a text message.
The law has a serious attitude problem.
12. Ben Jones
As a professional DJ my colegues and myself take situations like that very seriously, and if it had been in one of the bars or clubs I work in I would have hoped the same action would have been taken. If the lad got 6 months he'll be out in 3 which I think is fair. It makes him an example to others, and should reduce the risk of other people doing the same thing. Good on the judge, finally a success in the UK's legal system!
13. anonymous
While I agree that these pranks should be punished, I do feel that someone stealing a car while drunk should be treated more heavily than someone playing a (admittedly) sick joke, I guess that this is just the state of the judicial system here though
14. anonymous
Yes, it sounds harsh, but...
This guy presumably expected the message would be displayed on the screen. The risk of panic (even if it was not inevitable) should be obvious to anyone. The fact he was drunk is almost irrelevant.
Anyone who thinks the risk of panic is not obvious is a danger to themselves and others.
He obviously deserves punishment but we weren't in court so don't know enough about it to say how harsh it really is.
15. Tim R
The idiot was making a bomb threat and deserves what he got (even if he will only serve half the time....) The London Underground gets hundreds of bomb threats a month and has to select which ones to act on - but they have lots of experience. How were the nightclub staff expected to make that sort of decision?
16. Fergus Allan
It is harsh. It is deliberately harsh as the judge has decided to make an example of him. Is it fair on the individual? No.
Thats the way the system works. Justice is not equal nor fair. it is there to maintain the peace.
17. John W
Harsh sentencing was called for.
A robust response to this man's stupidly was warranted. The excuse he used of being drunk applies equally to the others in the club, who would hardly have been in a suitable state to judge whether the message was a joke or not. Without wanting to sound too old fashioned, I can't help feeling that far too many people nowadays don't have the decency to accept responsibility for their actions.
Having said all that, I do think that a custodial sentence was going a little too far. After all, despite the risk that the text posed, the club were at least sensible in screening all messages. Assuming the offender didn't have any previous 'history' then a severe community service term plus a large fine would have been far more suitable to give him the necessary kick up the rear end.
It's a funny old world where people involved in street violence or burglary oftern get community service and someone primarily guilty of unacceptable stupidity gets jail.
18. anonymous
If I’d been banged up for every jape and scrape I got into when I was 18 I think I'd still be in jail. A sentence completely out of proportion to the offence.
First, the message was never screened and no-one was hurt. Second, the chap was under the influence (no excuse, but, heh, we've all been there). Lastly, wouldn't community service have been punishment enough (on top of the presumed personal and family embarrassment).
Anyone remember what Vinny Jones got community service for? Frankly, I'd have been more scared aboard that aircraft. When Vinny says he’s going to do something you tend to believe him.
19. Paul Evans
If a nightclub allows drunken teenagers to text messages to the whole club, then it's themselves who should be facing a stretch.
There but for the grace of god go all of us.
20. J P
Knowing that club, most of the people in there would have been on pills anyway. So were probably already as paranoid as you can get. Its possible that the message would have caused panic.
It would have been better if the bouncers had been able to work out who it was, and then they could have just kicked him out of the club with a physical warning.
21. Anonymous Coward
Freedom of speech and expression are important rights which have to be upheld.
But everybody agrees that nobody has the right to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater, and that is the exact equivalent of what this individual did.
The punishment is therefore appropriate to the seriousness of the crime.
22. anonymous
And if 20 people had been crushed to death in the ensuing panic? 20 hours of community service would suffice, would it?
23. royston
have a few drinks and get pissed ,then wait for an idiot to do what this idiot did, then wait for some people to get trampled on, maybe the odd injury and possibly death of your girlfriend/boyfriend. and then say, sorry judge dont you think 6 months was a bit harsh on the idiot. not harsh enough and you would want to bring back capital punishment wouldnt you eh? it doesnt matter if hes young and imature.....hes an out an out plonker and should be banned from every drinking establishment in the country till hes old enough to be responsible. DANGEROUS IDIOT!!!
24. anonymous
What If Your Mother Daughter Or Son Were Crushed In The Panic.
And They Were Killed Or Crippled For Life. 6 Month Wouldn't Be Enough. Drunken Stupid Selfish People And Their Supporters Need A Wake Up Call. We Live In A World Of Many People And If You Are Not Part Of The Solution You Are The Problem.
25. stu
Explosions kill school children
NBC News and news services
Updated: 2:33 p.m. ET April 21, 2004BASRA, Iraq - Five suicide attackers detonated simultaneous car bombs outside police buildings during rush hour Wednesday, killing 68 people, including kindergartners and middle-school girls who burned to death in their school buses. It was the bloodiest attack in the southern Iraqi city during the U.S.-led occupation.
Take it seriously.
26. david harris
In this day and age of terrorism, That fool got off pretty good in my opinion.
27. anonymous
If the same punishment was applied on a rising scale from this, to muggers, car thieves,rapists,robbers etc the use of it being a deterrent would benefit us all. The problem is the inconsistancy of judges determining a murderer from a parking offender makes it the pathetic judicial system that we have today.
28. Jerrold Baldwin
Who is paying for this ridiculous incarceration? The British taxpayer.
(Sorry to sound like a Daily Mail reader).
Is the club partially responsible? Did they sell him any alcohol? Is the club profit-making?
I suspect that the idea of having the message board system was not one of public safety or service. They seemed to operate some form of censorship, probably because they did not trust their clients to post messages that were visible to the public.
The Judge should resign. We should have a long hard look at what the Police think is important, and the extant laws in Britain.
On second thoughts, there is merit in sending everyone who makes a stupid and or costly error to jail:
members of the government and their families;
civil servants;
members of the media;
doctors;
policemen;
solicitors; and, oh yes,
judges.
(Actually the list is almost endless).
The only difference is that they are normally not drunk!
29. Angus Doyle
Its harsh in the sense that the message never got to the screen, and the nightclub gave someone the means to abuse.
At the end of the day, I and all the other tax payers in this country have to pay for this kids incarceration. It was a silly joke, and put it down to boys will be boys.. however he made a bad judgement and should indeed pay, perhaps some community service working in a hospital with victims who have suffered from acts of war and terrorism.
But in this case the punishment did not fit the crime, instead we pay for this kids crime. I am sure he will meet some nice people in there that can teach him things he didn't know.
If the law is absolute then there can be no justice...
30. Charles Wood
This is typical of fascist modern Britain. The terrorist threat will be used to implement many unaceptable checking systems which will errode the rights of individuals, and allow people in power to act without checks. So a stupid drunken idiot sent a silly obvious message and the police and club wasted hundreds of pounds by not recognising it for what it was. Then an equally humorless judge wasted even more huge amounts of state funds jailing the idiot.
The judge concerned should be fined for being equally stupid!
In this climate you won't publish this email because you to will be scared of being jailed for standing up and saying the authorities were out of order. Thus proving how nasty fascism is.
31. Jon Scriven
Maybe a custodial sentence is a bit harsh, but is this really any different to phoning in a bomb scare ?? People could have been injured in the ensuing chaos (people who were also drunk and maybe wouldn't have realised that this was a hoax). Bear in mind that the Bali bombing and the nail bomber both targetted clubs/pubs causing huge loss of life.