Vandal ripped out the CCTV camera of vulnerable woman

8:30am Wednesday 11th July 2012 in News By Laura Smith

A VANDAL tore down a CCTV camera a day after it was installed to make an elderly woman feel safe.

Maynul Hussain admitted ripping down the camera after mistakingly calling at the 83-year-old’s home in Benfleet and realising he was being filmed.

The family of the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, only installed the camera the previous day, after a burglar broke into her house and exposed himself in January.

Hussain, 19, of Dove Drive, Benfleet, pleaded guilty to causing criminal damage when he appeared in Southend Magistrates’ Court yesterday.

Glenda Thompson, prosecuting, said: “Her family decided they would install CCTV, so if there were a return of the offender or any other incident, it would be captured on CCTV. Her son-in-law installed the CCTV, but the following day this defendant’s face was captured on it.

“He appeared at the front door of the address, appeared to tamper with the CCTV and moments later the picture disappeared.”

The court heard unemployed Hussain had been drinking in a nearby park, before deciding to call on a friend called Jason.

He knocked on the woman’s door, but was told no one of that name lived there.

When he realised he was being filmed, he tore down the camera and threw it into a ditch.

He was fined £135, £105 in court costs and ordered to pay £28.99 compensation for the damage to the camera.

Emma Grewock, defending, said: “Perhaps the only aggravating matter in this situation is the lady is elderly, and thus potentially vulnerable.”

Police confirmed a man had broken into the same address on January 23 and exposed himself.

Officers later arrested a man on suspicion of sexual assault, but released him without charge because of a lack of evidence.

An Essex Police spokesman said: “It remains an undetected crime.”

Comments (17)

9:30am Wed 11 Jul 12

SpiffSpaff84 says...

So basically shes been the victim of 2 crimes and both times the criminal escaped punishment
So basically shes been the victim of 2 crimes and both times the criminal escaped punishment SpiffSpaff84

9:56am Wed 11 Jul 12

APR says...

Well at least the camera did what it was designed for.

Just a shame that more thought wasn't given to it's positioning.
Well at least the camera did what it was designed for. Just a shame that more thought wasn't given to it's positioning. APR

10:23am Wed 11 Jul 12

A Dad says...

'Calling on a friend and knocking on the wrong door'.....I don't believe a word of it.
These people go knocking on doors looking for an opportunity to rob old or vulnerable people.
'Calling on a friend and knocking on the wrong door'.....I don't believe a word of it. These people go knocking on doors looking for an opportunity to rob old or vulnerable people. A Dad

11:07am Wed 11 Jul 12

R85 says...

Presumably the only amount that goes to the victim is the £28.99 compo for the camera costs!? WTF if wrong with this country? So the courts think her sons time installing it is free then? They think that getting somebody in to install it free then? They should be made to pay extra – that’s not compensation at all it’s just the cost of the camera! So basically the womans ended up with having to have a camera reinstalled with no financial help! Nice country we live in – I should be a criminal scum bag! Why the fk not ffs… Irritating
Presumably the only amount that goes to the victim is the £28.99 compo for the camera costs!? WTF if wrong with this country? So the courts think her sons time installing it is free then? They think that getting somebody in to install it free then? They should be made to pay extra – that’s not compensation at all it’s just the cost of the camera! So basically the womans ended up with having to have a camera reinstalled with no financial help! Nice country we live in – I should be a criminal scum bag! Why the fk not ffs… Irritating R85

2:01pm Wed 11 Jul 12

knightmare14 says...

Sounds like he was the Flasher who had come back for another go! Cut it's bits off = problem solved!
Sounds like he was the Flasher who had come back for another go! Cut it's bits off = problem solved! knightmare14

5:40pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Last Poster says...

Emma Grewock, defending, said: “Perhaps the only aggravating matter in this situation is the lady is elderly, and thus potentially vulnerable.”
I take it that is that moron's defender. Has she got that dead wrong! I am truly fed up with these "do anything for money" defenders. Why should they be allowed to defend the indefensible. That camera may have been the only thing that saved this elderly woman from god only knows what. His very name offends me. Who knows how many years of this ladies' life are sacrificed to these kinds of threat. Do you think she will just get on with her life and forget the threat? Still, she can always go into a council care home. Oh no, that's right, the council is after closing those now. Oh well, she had a good innings I suppose!
Emma Grewock, defending, said: “Perhaps the only aggravating matter in this situation is the lady is elderly, and thus potentially vulnerable.” I take it that is that moron's defender. Has she got that dead wrong! I am truly fed up with these "do anything for money" defenders. Why should they be allowed to defend the indefensible. That camera may have been the only thing that saved this elderly woman from god only knows what. His very name offends me. Who knows how many years of this ladies' life are sacrificed to these kinds of threat. Do you think she will just get on with her life and forget the threat? Still, she can always go into a council care home. Oh no, that's right, the council is after closing those now. Oh well, she had a good innings I suppose! Last Poster

6:54pm Wed 11 Jul 12

whataday says...

The git was obviously up to no good otherwise he wouldn't have torn down the camera
As for Emma Greenock his defence solicitor saying "Perhaps the only aggravating matter in this situation is the lady is elderly" - she should be held up for contempt. The aggravating matters are that she came up with such a despicable comment, the defendant told bare-faced lies, and if he wasn't up to no good then why did he feel the need to destroy the CCTV. and the sentence is too light.
The git was obviously up to no good otherwise he wouldn't have torn down the camera As for Emma Greenock his defence solicitor saying "Perhaps the only aggravating matter in this situation is the lady is elderly" - she should be held up for contempt. The aggravating matters are that she came up with such a despicable comment, the defendant told bare-faced lies, and if he wasn't up to no good then why did he feel the need to destroy the CCTV. and the sentence is too light. whataday

7:58pm Wed 11 Jul 12

ddtthundersley says...

Have a look at the **** facebook account!!
Have a look at the **** facebook account!! ddtthundersley

8:00pm Wed 11 Jul 12

ddtthundersley says...

ddtthundersley wrote:
Have a look at the **** facebook account!!
Wannabe gangster with a touch of racist thrown in!!
[quote][p][bold]ddtthundersley[/bold] wrote: Have a look at the **** facebook account!![/p][/quote]Wannabe gangster with a touch of racist thrown in!! ddtthundersley

8:05pm Wed 11 Jul 12

ddtthundersley says...

ddtthundersley wrote:
ddtthundersley wrote:
Have a look at the **** facebook account!!
Wannabe gangster with a touch of racist thrown in!!
And according to his facebook profile he hates the police..... wonder why!!
[quote][p][bold]ddtthundersley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ddtthundersley[/bold] wrote: Have a look at the **** facebook account!![/p][/quote]Wannabe gangster with a touch of racist thrown in!![/p][/quote]And according to his facebook profile he hates the police..... wonder why!! ddtthundersley

8:22pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Sean4u says...

135 quid!

Container, seats, pedals, generators, energy meters, he could have been sentenced to 20KWh to have been 'repaid' on consecutive days with a minimum 'ride' of 1 hour:

http://www.wlsam.com
/Article.asp?id=2490
867&spid=

Come on, you know it makes sense!

I expect he was defended by a duty solicitor or similar - I'd be surprised to hear he hired an expensive one. We have an adversarial legal system, so someone must speak for and someone must speak against, while it's someone else' job to pass judgement.

Imagine it was your job to speak 'for' - you would have to discharge your obligation towards your post or find another career. I don't envy the defending role in cases such as this one, although my eyes also narrowed a little at the implication that the victim's age was an unfortunate and unforeseen coincidence.
135 quid! Container, seats, pedals, generators, energy meters, he could have been sentenced to 20KWh to have been 'repaid' on consecutive days with a minimum 'ride' of 1 hour: http://www.wlsam.com /Article.asp?id=2490 867&spid= Come on, you know it makes sense! I expect he was defended by a duty solicitor or similar - I'd be surprised to hear he hired an expensive one. We have an adversarial legal system, so someone must speak for and someone must speak against, while it's someone else' job to pass judgement. Imagine it was your job to speak 'for' - you would have to discharge your obligation towards your post or find another career. I don't envy the defending role in cases such as this one, although my eyes also narrowed a little at the implication that the victim's age was an unfortunate and unforeseen coincidence. Sean4u

9:58pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Last Poster says...

Looked at his pics on Facebook. Pity they didn't use those for a character reference! Seems like a peace-loving lad, with a chip bigger than the shard on his shoulder! If you take notice of his bragging, he hates police, he hates whites and he only loves one person.
Looked at his pics on Facebook. Pity they didn't use those for a character reference! Seems like a peace-loving lad, with a chip bigger than the shard on his shoulder! If you take notice of his bragging, he hates police, he hates whites and he only loves one person. Last Poster

11:45pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Trainman says...

HAD it been me, or another with an English name, we WOULD have been jailed, and I am NOT a racist in ANY way.
HAD it been me, or another with an English name, we WOULD have been jailed, and I am NOT a racist in ANY way. Trainman

5:02pm Fri 13 Jul 12

thesouthendone says...

Surely if someone reports him to the police he would get arrested for insiting racial hatered????
Surely if someone reports him to the police he would get arrested for insiting racial hatered???? thesouthendone

5:45pm Fri 13 Jul 12

thesouthendone says...

I don't have facebook but if someone where to get screenshots of this guys page and forward them onto the police station that they are deeply offended then this guy will get arrested and his punishment will be a lot harsher than what he got for the camera offence. He deserves it, he deserves a lot worse.
I don't have facebook but if someone where to get screenshots of this guys page and forward them onto the police station that they are deeply offended then this guy will get arrested and his punishment will be a lot harsher than what he got for the camera offence. He deserves it, he deserves a lot worse. thesouthendone

8:22pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Virtuallintu says...

He's a class act and no mistake. Doubtless his family are so proud of him.
He's a class act and no mistake. Doubtless his family are so proud of him. Virtuallintu

6:30pm Sun 15 Jul 12

termite1944 says...

So does the £28.99 cover all the costs of reinstalling the camera?

He should be sent to a boot camp!
So does the £28.99 cover all the costs of reinstalling the camera? He should be sent to a boot camp! termite1944

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree