Grantham court: Woman in drunken attack on ex-housemate

Court news.

Court news.

0
Have your say

A woman clawed at the neck of a former housemate in a takeaway in a drunken unprovoked attack, a court has heard.

Hannah Wilcock, 30, of River View Maltings, Grantham, lunged at a man she used to live with after seeing him in Pizza Place in Market Place, Grantham, at about 2am on May 17.

Jim Clare, prosecuting, told Grantham Magistrates’ Court on Monday that the victim was left with scratch marks on his neck and arms after the attack.

Mr Clare said the man had been on a night out with friends and was waiting in a queue when Wilcock began shouting at him. She then “all of a sudden” lunged at him. He shouted at her but did not retaliate and another man grabbed Wilcock in a “bear hug” and pulled her away.

The court heart Wilcock had lived with the man about a year previously, but the two had fallen out.

Wilcock admitted one charge of assault by beating.

The court heard she had one previous conviction for causing actual bodily harm in 2007, for which she was given a suspended sentence of 100 hours of community work.

In her defence, Stuart Wild said Wilcock did not usually go out drinking and this was an exception.

She had seen the victim, who was a friend of many years, but who she had fallen out with after an argument about a wallet when they lived together.

She wanted to speak to him but he made it clear that he didn’t want to talk to her, so she “lashed out”.

“In her own words, the red mist descended,” said Mr Wild. “It was over in a matter of seconds.

“She’s a young mother. This was an isolated incident.”

Mr Wild said Wilcock was “remorseful” that she found herself in that situation, and she hadn’t been out drinking since.

Wilcock was given a 12-month conditional discharge, ordered to pay £150 compensation, a criminal courts charge of £150, costs of £30 and a victim surcharge of £15.

Magistrate Kevin Moody said: “You understand that this is going to be hanging over you for 12 months.

“Another court with a similar offence may not take the same view.”