A pair of masked teenagers battered a man after luring him to a Fife viaduct in the dead of night in a dispute over “stolen cigarettes”.
Jamie Fendick and Levi Austin left their victim bloodied on July 1 last year.
Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court heard he had been a friend of 18-year-old Fendick’s, though the pair had only met twice.
He had initially been asked to go to Glenwood High School at 1am but was then told to meet at Leslie viaduct.
There, he found the teenagers wearing balaclavas.
Austin grabbed him and told him: “Don’t say anything, stay quiet.”
He then produced a seven-inch spanner from his hoodie pocket.
He repeatedly struck the male on the head with it, drawing blood.
He managed to get away and asked for an ambulance when he reached the nearest house.
At Victoria Hospital he was found to have a four-inch gash on the back of his head, which was cleaned and glued shut.
His blood was later found on Fendick’s trainers and the spanner, also covered in the man’s blood, was also found in Fendick’s bedroom.
In a police interview, Austin, 19, told officers he was responsible and the attack was over stolen cigarettes.
He also told officers he did not think it would get so out of hand.
Sentencing
The teenagers returned to the dock to be sentenced following the completion of background reports.
At an earlier hearing, both Fendick, and Austin admitted that while masked, they seized the man, repeatedly struck him on the head with a spanner, repeatedly kicked him on the body while he was lying on the ground and threatened him with violence.
Fendick’s solicitor Martin McGuire said his client lives with his mother in Livingston.
“There are concerns about Mr Fendick’s level of maturity.
“He has some physical health difficulties.”
Lucy Boylen, appearing for Austin, of Anstruther, said: “Mr Austin has previously completed community payback orders.
“He currently resides with his mum and dad. They are fully supportive.”
Sheriff Robert More placed Fendick on a four-month curfew and ordered Austin to complete 100 hours of unpaid work.
Both sentences were imposed as alternatives to detention.
He said: “Whilst it was, in legal terms, a charge of minor assault to which you both pleaded guilty, it was a very significant incident.
“I do consider that it could properly merit the imposition of custody; however alternatives are identified.
“I don’t differentiate between you in terms of your involvement.”
For more local court content visit our page or join us on Facebook.
