Date: 11th June 2011 at 12:45pm
Written by:

The MEN report that our young star might not be off the hook just yet.

Talented United youngster Ravel Morrison could still be heading to jail, according to the Manchester Evening News.

Morrison, who received two criminal convictions in four months during the first half of 2011, was spared jail in May and received a fine after he admitted causing criminal damage following an arguement with his girlfriend.

However, the MEN reports that the sentence is about to be looked at again.  here’s their report:

“An investigation has been launched into the sentencing of a United starlet who was spared jail after his second conviction in four months.

Ravel Morrison was warned in January that he would be locked up for a year if he was convicted of another offence before the end of 2011.

The warning came as he was given a 12-month referral order at Trafford Youth Court for witness intimidation.

But in May, Morrison, 18, escaped with just a fine at Salford magistrates’ court after admitting criminal damage following a bust-up with his girlfriend. Now the sentence is being reviewed after the family of the victim in the first case complained to Tameside youth offending team – which has been handling Morrison’s referral order – and threatened to apply for a judicial review.

It is understood Salford magistrates are considering bringing Morrison back before the court to face new sentencing.

The M.E.N. has been shown a copy of a letter sent to the family by Jim Taylor, the boss of Tameside’s youth offending team.

He explains that the matter is being investigated and the authority has written to Salford magistrates. And he reveals that by fining Morrison, the court caused the referral order to be automatically cancelled.

He wrote: “It would appear from subsequent investigation that the act of imposing a fine has the effect of automatically revoking the referral order, something that the sentencing court would appear to have overlooked. As a result of this I have contacted Salford magistrates’ court and they are looking into the matter. One possibility is that they can re-open the criminal damage case and re-sentence also taking into account the offence for which Ravel received the referral order.”

District judge Jonathan Feinstein fined Morrison £600 and ordered him to pay £100 costs when he pleaded guilty to criminal damage at Salford magistrates on May 25. He had been accused of throwing his girlfriend’s £150 mobile phone out of a window after a row.

He told the M.E.N: “It is not appropriate for me to comment and the case will be reviewed in court.” A Tameside council spokesman said: “The decision to revoke the referral order was not taken by Tameside council, it was taken by Salford magistrates court. As a resutt of this, the council has written to the court expressing its concern that the decision to revoke the order will cause distress for the family of the victim.

“The council is waiting to hear the outcome of the court’s decision regarding this case.”

Morrison has been tipped as one of United’s brightest hopes for the next decade. He scored two goals to help his team win the FA Youth Cup last month.”


11 responses to “United youngster Morrison could still go to prison”

  1. Red Ken says:

    Theres a part of me the that hopes he does get sent down. As much of a great talent he is, I have known guys like this. Small time local celebs cum local gangsters who throw it all away because they hang around with unsavoury characters and can’t help but be a big fish in a small pond. Ravel thinks the law doesn’t apply to him. Promote Pogba ahead of him

  2. derek says:

    going to jail for throwing gf’s phone and argue with her? why they want him to go to jail so badly? A YEAR? That is hard fuck up is Britain law. Instead of changing youth into a better person, they throw them in jail? i saw many news reports about killers/rapists being released or given light sentences for unforgivable crimes and here i am seeing stupid things like that. Why small crimes get insanely punished while the larger fishes escape every time.

    • Quis says:

      I take it you’re not the brightest star in the sky. He’s had one conviction and put on probation… A conviction means the courts found him in contravention of certain laws that protect society. What part of that is difficult for you? Probation means he can’t fuck up again or the court will enforce his sentencing. It has nothing to do with your tooth faeries or the cost of your meds… The way this kid is going he will certainly be one of the ‘fish’ as you so quaintly put it.

  3. Robbo says:

    I didn’t see the word jail mentioned in the MEN article. “New sentancing” does not automatically mean jail and I agree with Derek that a jail sentance would be ludicrous in the circumstances. Obviously the referral order should not have been revoked so this looks more like a procedural matter to restore that order more than anything else. Maybe take away one of his goals from the youth cup final as an additional sentance…

    • “Ravel Morrison was warned in January that he would be locked up for a year if he was convicted of another offence before the end of 2011.”

      Pedantic to point this out, but the rest of your comment seems quite well put, so it was worth the reply.

      • Robbo says:

        I take your point Steve but it would be farcical if he went to jail over throwing a mobile phone (accidentally or intentionally) out of a window. Whilst this is technically another conviction and seemingly he should be locked up for a year it is also the case that a custodial sentence is the last resort for the courts. I think the courts do have some flexibility on this and are not obliged to impose a custodial sentence depsite the prior warning. If he had been convicted of a more serious offence (eg witness intimidation) it would obviously change matters.

        • Steve Crabtree says:

          Oh yeah, I agree Robbo.

          This piece is merely just bringing the MEN report to people’s attention, and it’s not mine or RFFH views.

  4. jose says:

    I don’t think throwing his girls phone out a window warents doing time, how did this ever get to court? Just cos he’s got previous it doesn’t mean tax payers cash should be wasted on pointless court hearings or putting him inside, wat a joke,

  5. Robbo says:

    It got to court because of the assault charge of which there was no evidence for the prosecution. Apparently his girlfriend was the first to throw his mobile (Ravel has several mobiles btw) across the room and he responded in kind only for it to fly out of the window. Now, I know there is a referral order in place and that supposedly if he was to commit another offence that he’d get a custodial sentence, but I don’t think the magistrates court was ignorant of the referral order. It’s a procedural matter that needs correcting. Nothing more.

  6. eric says:

    Kinda hope prison will be the wake up call for him. Next year he’ll be more mature and more usefull for us.