'Brave' South Shields father and son shopkeepers stopped robbers
Two robbers who were thwarted in their attempt to rob a corner shop by a "courageous" father and son have been jailed for three years each.Gary Brown, 38, thrust a Stanley knife towards a shopkeeper as he and Mark Robson, 43, tried to steal money from a store in South Shields in November, Newcastle Crown Court heard.After initially managing to grab some cash, the pair were overpowered by the father and son who ran the shop.Both the accused, of Beach Road in South Shields, admitted robbery with Brown also pleading guilty to possessing a knife.
The pair entered the shop at about 20:00 GMT on 17 November and demanded money, prosecutor Ian Cook said.The shopkeepers, an adult father and son, were "showing some bravery" when they tackled and "got the better" of the robbers, Mr Cook said.
'Particularly unpleasant'
In statements read to the court, the shop owners said they were now fearful of future robberies and the risk that posed to their younger relatives who regularly worked there.They had also spent a lot of money installing new security measures including a £70 a month panic button alarm system, the court heard.In mitigation, the court heard both men were living in a hostel at the time, were fuelled by drink and were "deeply ashamed" of their actions.Recorder Peter Makepeace KC said it was a "particularly unpleasant" crime which had had an ongoing impact on the victims.He said the shopkeepers had shown "courage" but their fears for their younger workers were understandable.Both Robson and Brown were also made subject to restraining orders banning them from contacting the two victims or going to the shop for 10 years.
Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram. Send your story ideas here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
21 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Chris Brown pleads not guilty to UK assault charge
The 36-year-old appeared at London's Southwark Crown Court, where supporters filled the public gallery ahead of the hearing. The two-time Grammy Award winner, known for hits such as "Loyal," "Run It" and "Under the Influence," was granted bail in May after promising to pay a $6.7 million security fee in order to begin his "Breezy Bowl XX" tour. During the court hearing, Brown spoke only to confirm his name and date of birth and to deny the charge of attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm, telling the court clerk: "Not guilty, ma'am." Chris Brown makes bail, surrenders passport as world tour looms His co-defendant, Omololu Akinlolu, 38, also pleaded not guilty to the charge of attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm. The pair were granted bail until their next court appearance on July 11, when they may be asked to enter a plea to a less serious charge of assault causing actual bodily harm. Brown is also charged with having an offensive weapon, namely a bottle, but was not asked to enter a plea on Friday. Their trial is scheduled to begin on October 26, 2026. Supporters said "We love you, Chris" as Brown left the dock after the brief hearing. The R&B star was arrested at a hotel in Manchester, northern England, last month after returning to Britain for the first time since the incident two years ago.
The National
a day ago
- The National
SFA hit back at Rangers over John Brown 'corrupt' fine row
Bomber Brown gave his opinion when there was no goal awarded, despite the ball clearly being over the line, during Rangers' last match of last season at Easter Road. Appearing on Rangers TV that day, he said: "I would say it's corrupt." Tom Miller quickly responded: "I'm not sure we can actually say that." "Well I am saying it," Brown added. "That's a disgrace and it's the worst decision I've seen in all the years I've been in football." The SFA handed out a £3,000 fine to the Ibrox club after they were found to be in breach of the rules following the incident. Rangers issued a strongly worded statement on Thursday evening in response, as they insisted they would be watching proceedings closely relating to content produced by club TV channels of other Scottish clubs. Now, the SFA has maintained the charge was rightly passed down in line with the rulebook, as they reminded clubs of 'their responsibilities' "We note Rangers' response to the determination of a recent independent Judicial Panel Tribunal," an SFA spokesperson said. "In the interests of accuracy, we wish to address some of the misleading comments contained therein: "The sanction imposed by an independent panel was entirely in keeping with the application of the rules. "The most recent and relevant example of a similar breach, the sanction imposed on Richard Foster of Motherwell FC for comments of a similar nature in the media, attests to that. Read more: "Furthermore, to address the comments regarding 'rationale behind differing outcomes', we wish to point to the fact that investigations were undertaken in previous cases outlined and that the Compliance Officers of the time saw fit to issue a censure by way of warning letter for potential breaches deemed insufficiently serious to be progressed to a Notice of Complaint. "This system of proportionality has been adopted since the inception of the Judicial Panel Protocol in 2011. "Indeed, such discretion was exercised last season when the Compliance Officer wrote to the club to warn of the future conduct of players following matters involving Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohamed Diomande. "We also note that Rangers intend to contact the association to seek clarity on the Judicial Panel Protocol and its application. "The club is, in fact, already represented on the JPP Working Group. "We have requested written reasons from the panel chair involved in the tribunal and in the interests of transparency, will publish in due course. "JPP Rule 38 was introduced in response to the referee strike of 2010, when match officials campaigned for greater protection after enduring sustained personal criticism from clubs and fans. "Ahead of a new season, we remind clubs of their responsibilities in this regard."
Scotsman
a day ago
- Scotsman
Rangers accused of 'misleading comments' as SFA hit back in John Brown row
Governing body issue response to Ibrox club claims Sign up to our Football newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The Scottish Football Association has accused Rangers of issuing 'misleading comments' in their criticism of punishment handed down for a remark from John Brown on the club's media channels. Rangers were fined £3,000 following a disciplinary hearing after being charged with breaching rule 38, which states that clubs should not allow any criticism of match officials 'calculated to indicate bias or incompetence' or to 'impinge upon his character'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Former Ibrox player Brown, while working as a pundit on Rangers TV, claimed a decision not to award Rangers a goal at Easter Road on the final weekend of the league season was 'corruption' amid a debate over whether the ball had crossed the line. Rangers have been accused of making 'misleading comments' by the Scottish FA. | Getty Images Rangers on Thursday claimed they had 'flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels' during the hearing and questioned a 'lack of consistency' with the SFA's approach. An SFA statement read: 'We note Rangers' response to the determination of a recent independent Judicial Panel Tribunal. In the interests of accuracy, we wish to address some of the misleading comments contained therein. 'The sanction imposed by an independent panel was entirely in keeping with the application of the rules. The most recent and relevant example of a similar breach, the sanction imposed on Richard Foster of Motherwell FC for comments of a similar nature in the media, attests to that. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Furthermore, to address the comments regarding 'rationale behind differing outcomes', we wish to point to the fact that investigations were undertaken in previous cases outlined and that the compliance officers of the time saw fit to issue a censure by way of warning letter for potential breaches deemed insufficiently serious to be progressed to a notice of complaint. 'This system of proportionality has been adopted since the inception of the Judicial Panel Protocol in 2011. Indeed, such discretion was exercised last season when the compliance officer wrote to (Rangers) to warn of the future conduct of players following matters involving Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohamed Diomande. Former Rangers defender John Brown. | SNS Group 'We also note that Rangers intend to contact the association to seek clarity on the Judicial Panel Protocol and its application. The club is, in fact, already represented on the JPP Working Group. 'We have requested written reasons from the panel chair involved in the tribunal and in the interests of transparency will publish in due course. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'JPP Rule 38 was introduced in response to the referee strike of 2010, when match officials campaigned for greater protection after enduring sustained personal criticism from clubs and fans. Ahead of a new season, we remind clubs of their responsibilities in this regard.'
