Man hit victim with his own walking stick

An Earlston man attacked a 56-year-old neighbour with a walking stick during an argument, Selkirk Sheriff Court has been told.
Selkirk Sheriff CourtSelkirk Sheriff Court
Selkirk Sheriff Court

Domenyk Taylor, 23, pleaded guilty to the assault which happened in Earlston on February 29.

He admitted a charge of pushing the man on the body and then repeatedly striking the man on the head with the walking stick, causing a two-inch cut.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Depute fiscal Fiona Hamilton said the victim heard noise outside his property and when he looked through a peephole he saw Taylor kick a storage container outside his front door.

She continued:”The complainer stepped outside and told him to stop it and the accused, who was with his girlfriend, said:”I will do what I want.”

“The complainer had a walking stick and said to the accused ‘You stay there and I will stay here.’

The accused then took hold of the walking stick and struck him to the head.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Ms Hamilton said Taylor told police the man had threatened his girlfriend so he hit him with his walking stick, but there was no evidence of any threats made.

She added the complainer had a two-inch laceration to the head which required to be glued at Borders General Hospital. The man had a number of medical issues.

Defence lawyer Mat Patrick said Taylor, now living at Church Court in Earlston, had accidentally struck the complainer’s post box with his foot and the man reacted in an aggressive manner while holding the walking stick and there was a verbal confrontation.

He added:”He struck him and acknowledges he did that.”

Mr Patrick said his client had also telephoned the police about the incident.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Sheriff Alistair Noble noted Taylor was still completing a sentence of unpaid work for another offence.

He deferred sentence for good behaviour for three months and also to allow Taylor to comply with the previous pay back order.

Sheriff Noble said if Taylor completed the order then more hours of unpaid work would be the likely outcome but if he did not comply then custody would be an option.