Man has top of ear bitten off in fight

Tuesday 31st May 2011, 2:30PM BST.

Royal Court building A MAN had half his ear bitten off after he threw a pudding bowl at another, gashing his head.

Peter Horner lost half of his left ear after getting into a fight with Billy Truffitt.

Both were taken before the Royal Court where Truffitt, 23, pleaded guilty to unlawful wounding and Horner, 55, admitted assault.

Truffitt was sentenced to three years in prison while Horner was sentenced to 12 months suspended for two years.

Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.

To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.

View more: Assault news, Royal Court news.

1
Ray

May 31, 2011 at 6:58 pm

That reminds me of when I was in a packed doctor’s waiting room last February.A gent in a flat cap came in and the receptionist asked him why he wanted to see the doctor

He replied that he had something wrong with his willy.The receptionist told him off saying “You can’t say that in a crowded room .. you should say that you have something wrong with your ear and then you can tell the doctor your real problem in the privacy of his room

The man was a little embarrassed and left the waiting room for a couple of minutes before returning.He told the receptionist that he had something wrong with his ear

“That’s better” she said “And what’s the matter with your ear?”

“I can’t pee out of it” said the gent before sitting down to await his turn

Report abuse
2
Mr Peter Port

May 31, 2011 at 11:47 pm

The recent conviction of the rapist Filipe Burton was as commented generally a sad reflection on the moronic monsters that appear to be surfacing on our fair isle and certainly attracted a fair amount of feedback from all. On the front page today, we see another vile, psychopatic individual by the name of Billy Truffitt which again, really does call into question the rather bizzare sentancing policy in the Island.

31 mph in a 25mph, try a month, maybe two off the road? Mobile phone in your hand for the first time, that’ll be two weeks for you sir! General theft, “please don’t do it again” if you don’t mind….

23 years of age, 52 PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS and appearing from prison, three years for what was obviously a somewhat aggravated but unquestionably over the top, animal retaliation.

I wouldn’t know Billy Truffit if he stood up in my soup holding a sign that said “I’m Billy Truffit”, however, I’ve read more then enough to appreciate that this man is a sick, dangerous individual who really should not be let out in the public domain for a very long time. To be at 23 years of age and having a record of violence as he has, does anybody really think that the guy is sane or safe to be released, it’s so obvious that in the not too distant future he’ll be back in the press, jsut for something worse.

There really does need to be a sensible review carried out on our, for some offences, draconion policy of sentencing and for others, letting scum like this walk free after remand and parole in another 18 months.

Where will this guy be 2 years from now, I guarantee you, back in prison after ruining somebody’s face and life again, this sort of scum will just go on re-offending until he ends up with a sentence that finally takes him off the streets….

Why not do us all a favour and with the likes of Filipe Burton either lock them up permanently or just put them down, the law has got enough to deal with then running around after idiots like this are released back into society prematurely.

Sorry for the rant, but this Island is too good to be ruined by people like this!

Report abuse
3
gsydonkee

June 1, 2011 at 8:55 am

Mr St.Peter Port…………….well said!

GD.

Report abuse
4
bcb

June 1, 2011 at 9:29 am

Ray
I see you are a Jethro fan :) awsome.

Report abuse
5
Darren

June 2, 2011 at 12:47 am

I think 12 months suspended for 2 years is OK. All he needs to do in the next 2 years is something stupid again and he is locked up for a year, simple.

You can’t just keep filling the prison up and there has to be other factors of mitigation when considering the sentence – who knows what these were without having attended the entire trial: we would be a bit naive to suggest he should have got longer without further information.

In any case the person passing the sentence doesn’t just think ‘OK, what shall I give this bloke/woman’. They research previous information around other similar cases and what sentences these previously brought – this is important in case there is an appeal as the first thing the appellant will look at is ‘was the sentence fair and reasonable’.

Oh and Mr Peter Port – you must have a large soup bowl if people can stand up in it :-0.

Report abuse